LIBRARY 

University  of 

California 

Irvine 


THE  LIBRARY 

OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY 

OF  CALIFORNIA 

IRVINE 

IN  MEMORY  OF 

Gerald  Sherman 


/ 


A   HISTORY 
OF   OUR    OWN    TIMES 


IN   FOUR   VOLUMES 

VOLUME  I. 


BY 

JUSTIN  MCCARTHY 

AUTHOR  OF  "THE  FOUR  GEORGES"  "SiR  ROBERT  PEEL"  ETC. 


Elustratefc 


BOSTON 

ESTES    AND    LAURIAT 
1897 


LIST   OF   ILLUSTRATIONS. 

VOL.  I. 

PAGE 

VICTORIA  (August  10,  1835) Frontispiece 

LORD  BROUGHAM 32 

PRINCE  ALBERT 124 

JOHN  H.  NEWMAN 176 

DANIEL  O'CONNELL .     236 

ROBERT  PEEL  .  .  308 


A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 


CHAPTER  I. 

THE  KING  IS  DEAD  !    LONG  LIVE  THE  QUEEN  ! 

BEFORE  half-past  two  o'clock  on  the  morning  of  June 
20th,  1837,  William  IV.  was  lying  dead  in  Windsor  Castle, 
while  the  messengers  were  already  hurrying  off  to  Ken- 
sington Palace  to  bear  to  his  successor  her  summons  to 
the  throne.  The  illness  of  the  King  had  been  but  short, 
and  at  one  time,  even  after  it  had  been  pronounced  alarm- 
ing, it  seemed  to  take  so  hopeful  a  turn  that  the  physi- 
cians began  to  think  it  would  pass  harmlessly  away.  But 
the  King  was  an  old  man — was  an  old  man  even  when  he 
came  to  the  throne — and  when  the  dangerous  symptoms 
again  exhibited  themselves,  their  warning  was  very  soon 
followed  by  fulfilment.  The  death  of  King  William  may 
be  fairly  regarded  as  having  closed  an  era  of  our  history. 
With  him,  we  may  believe,  ended  the  reign  of  personal 
government  in  England.  William  was,  indeed,  a  constitu- 
tional king  in  more  than  mere  name.  Pie  was  to  the  best 
of  his  lights  a  faithful  representative  of  the  constitutional 
principle.  He  was  as  far  in  advance  of  his  two  predeces- 
sors in  understanding  and  acceptance  of  the  principle  as 
his  successor  has  proved  herself  beyond  him.  Constitu- 
tional government  has  developed  itself  gradually,  as  every- 


8  A  UISTOltY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

thing  else  has  done  in  English  politics.  The  written 
principle  and  code  of  its  system  it  would  be  as  vain  to 
look  for  as  for  the  British  Constitution  itself.  King  Wil- 
liam still  held  to  and  exercised  the  right  to  dismiss  his 
ministers  when  he  pleased,  and  because  he  pleased.  His 
father  had  held  to  the  right  of  maintaining  favorite  min- 
isters in  defiance  of  repeated  votes  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons. It  would  not  be  easy  to  find  any  written  rule  or 
declaration  of  constitutional  law  pronouncing  decisively 
that  either  was  in  the  wrong.  But  in  our  day  we  should 
believe  that  the  constitutional  freedom  of  England  was 
outraged,  or  at  least  put  in  the  extremest  danger,  if  a 
sovereign  were  to  dismiss  a  ministry  at  mere  pleasure,  or 
to  retain  it  in  spite  of  the  expressed  wish  of  the  House  of 
Commons.  Virtually,  therefore,  there  was  still  personal 
government  in  the  reign  of  William  IV.  With  his  death 
the  long  chapter  of  its  history  came  to  an  end.  We  find 
it  difficult  now  to  believe  that  it  was  a  living  principle, 
openly  at  work  among  us,  if  not  openly  acknowledged,  so 
lately  as  in  the  reign  of  King  William. 

The  closing  scenes  of  King  William's  life  were  undoubt- 
edly characterized  by  some  personal  dignity.  As  a  rule, 
sovereigns  show  that  they  know  how  to  die.  Perhaps  the 
necessary  consequence  of  their  training,  by  virtue  of  which 
they  come  to  regard  themselves  always  as  the  central 
figures  in  great  State  pageantry,  is  to  make  them  assume 
a  manner  of  dignity  on  all  occasions  when  the  eyes  of  their 
subjects  may  be  supposed  to  be  on  them,  even  if  the 
dignity  of  bearing  is  not  the  free  gift  of  nature.  The 
manners  of  William  IV.  had  been,  like  those  of  most  of 
his  brothers,  somewhat  rough  and  overbearing.  He  had 
been  an  unmanageable  naval  officer.  He  had  again  and 
again  disregarded  or  disobeyed  orders,  and  at  last  it  had 
been  found  convenient  to  withdraw  him  from  active  service 
altogether,  and  allow  him  to  rise  through  the  successive 


THE  KING  IS  DEAD!  LONG  LIVE  THE  QUEEN  I       9 

ranks  of  his  profession  by  a  merely  formal  and  technical 
process  of  ascent.  In  his  more  private  capacity  he  had, 
when  younger,  indulged  more  than  once  in  unseemly  and 
insufferable  freaks  of  temper.  He  had  made  himself 
unpopular,  while  Duke  of  Clarence,  by  his  strenuous 
opposition  to  some  of  the  measures  which  were  especially 
desired  by  all  the  enlightenment  of  the  country.  He  was, 
for  example,  a  determined  opponent  of  the  measures 
for  the  abolition  of  the  slave-trade.  He  had  wrangled 
publicly,  in  open  debate,  with  some  of  his  brothers  in  the 
House  of  Lords  ;  and  words  had  been  interchanged  among 
the  royal  princes  which  could  not  be  heard  in  our  day 
even  in  the  hottest  debates  of  the  more  turbulent  House 
of  Commons.  But  William  seems  to  have  been  one  of  the 
men  whom  increased  responsibility  improves.  He  was 
far  better  as  a  king  than  as  a  prince.  He  proved  that  he 
was  able  at  least  to  understand  that  first  duty  of  a  con- 
stitutional sovereign  which,  to  the  last  day  of  his  active 
life,  his  father,  George  III.,  never  could  be  brought  to 
comprehend — that  the  personal  predilections  and  preju- 
dices of  the  King  must  sometimes  give  way  to  the  public 
interest. 

Nothing  perhaps  in  life  became  him  like  to  the  leaving 
of  it.  His  closing  days  were  marked  by  gentleness  and 
kindly  consideration  for  the  feelings  of  those  around  him. 
When  he  awoke  on  June  18th  he  remembered  that  it  was 
the  anniversary  of  the  battle  of  Waterloo.  He  expressed  a 
strong  pathetic  wish  to  live  over  that  day,  even  if  he  were 
never  to  see  another  sunset.  He  called  for  the  flag  which 
the  Duke  of  Wellington  always  sent  him  on  that  anniver- 
sary, and  he  laid  his  hand  upon  the  eagle  which  adorned 
it,  and  said  he  felt  revived  by  the  touch.  He  had  himself 
attended,  since  his  accession,  the  Waterloo  banquet ;  but 
this  time  the  Duke  of  Wellington  thought  it  would  perhaps 
be  more  seemly  to  have  the  dinner  put  off,  and  sent  accord- 


10  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

ingly  to  take  the  wishes  of  his  Majesty.  The  King  declared 
that  the  dinner  must  go  on  as  usual,  and  sent  to  the  Duke 
a  friendly,  simple  message  expressing  his  hope  that  the 
guests  might  have  a  pleasant  day.  He  talked  in  his 
homely  way  to  those  about  him,  his  direct  language  seem- 
ing to  acquire  a  sort  of  tragic  dignity  from  the  approach 
of  the  death  that  was  so  near.  He  had  prayers  read  to 
him  again  and  again,  and  called  those  near  him  to  witness 
that  he  had  always  been  a  faithful  believer  in  the  truths 
of  religion.  He  had  his  despatch-boxes  brought  to  him, 
and  tried  to  get  through  some  business  with  his  private 
secretary.  It  was  remarked  with  some  interest  that  the 
last  official  act  he  ever  performed  was  to  sign  with  his 
trembling  hand  the  pardon  of  a  condemned  criminal. 
Even  a  far  nobler  reign  than  his  would  have  received  new 
dignity  if  it  closed  with  a  deed  of  mercy.  When  some  of 
those  around  him  endeavored  to  encourage  him  with  the 
idea  that  he  might  recover  and  live  many  years  yet,  he 
declared,  with  a  simplicity  which  had  something  oddly 
pathetic  in  it,  that  he  would  be  willing  to  live  ten  years 
yet  for  the  sake  of  the  country.  The  poor  King  was 
evidently  under  the  sincere  conviction  that  England  could 
hardly  get  on  without  him.  His  consideration  for  his 
country,  whatever  whimsical  thoughts  it  may  suggest,  is 
entitled  to  some,  at  least,  of  the  respect  which  we  give  to 
the  dying  groan  of  a  Pitt  or  a  Mirabeau,  who  fears  with 
too  much  reason  that  he  leaves  a  blank  not  easily  to  be 
filled.  "  Young  royal  tarry-breeks  "  William  had  been  jocu- 
larly called  by  Robert  Burns  fifty  years  before,  when  there 
was  yet  a  popular  belief  that  he  would  come  all  right  and 
do  brilliant  and  gallant  things,  and  become  a  stout  sailor 
in  whom  a  seafaring  nation  might  feel  pride.  He  disap- 
pointed all  such  expectations  ;  but  it  must  be  owned  that 
when  responsibility  came  upon  him  he  disappointed  ex- 
pectation anew  in  a  different  way,  and  was  a  better  sover- 


11 

eign,  more  deserving  of  the  complimentary  title  of  patriot- 
king,  than  even  his  friends  would  have  ventured  to  antic- 
ipate. 

There  were  eulogies  pronounced  upon  him  after  his  death 
in  both  Houses  of  Parliament,  as  a  matter  of  course.  It  is 
not  necessary,  however,  to  set  down  to  mere  court  homage 
or  parliamentary  form  some  of  the  praises  that  were  be- 
stowed on  the  dead  King  by  Lord  Melbourne  and  Lord 
Brougham  and  Lord  Grey.  A  certain  tone  of  sincerity,  not 
quite  free,  perhaps,  from  surprise,  appears  to  run  through 
some  of  these  expressions  of  admiration.  They  seem  to  say 
that  the  speakers  were  at  one  time  or  another  considerably 
surprised  to  find  that,  after  all,  William  really  was  able 
and  willing  on  grave  occasions  to  subordinate  his  personal 
likings  and  dislikings  to  considerations  of  State  policy,  and 
to  what  was  shown  to  him  to  be  for  the  good  of  the  nation. 
In  this  sense  at  least  he  may  be  called  a  patriot-king.  We 
have  advanced  a  good  deal  since  that  time,  and  we  require 
somewhat  higher  and  more  positive  qualities  in  a  sovereign 
now  to  excite  our  political  wonder.  But  we  must  judge 
William  by  the  reigns  that  went  before,  and  not  the  reign 
that  came  after  him ;  and  with  that  consideration  borne 
in  mind,  we  may  accept  the  panegyric  of  Lord  Melbourne 
and  of  Lord  Grey,  and  admit  that  on  the  whole  he  was 
better  than  his  education,  his  early  opportunities,  and  his 
early  promise. 

William  IV.  (third  son  of  George  III.)  had  left  no  chil- 
dren who  could  have  succeeded  to  the  throne,  and  the  crown 
passed,  therefore,  to  the  daughter  of  his  brother  (fourth 
son  of  George),  the  Duke  of  Kent.  This  was  the  Princess 
Alexandrina  Victoria,  who  was  born  at  Kensington  Palace 
on  May  24th,  1819.  The  Princess  was,  therefore,  at  this 
time  little  more  than  eighteen  years  of  age.  The  Duke  of 
Kent  died  a  few  months  after  the  birth  of  his  daughter, 
and  the  child  was  brought  up  under  the  care  of  his  widow. 


12  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

She  was  well  brought  up  :  both  as  regards  her  intellect 
and  her  character  her  training  was  excellent.  She  was 
taught  to  be  self-reliant,  brave,  and  systematical.  Pru- 
dence and  economy  were  inculcated  on  her  as  though  she 
had  been  born  to  be  poor.  One  is  not  generally  inclined 
to  attach  much  importance  to  what  historians  tell  us  of 
the  education  of  contemporary  princes  or  princesses ;  but 
it  cannot  be  doubted  that  the  Princess  Victoria  was  trained 
for  intelligence  and  goodness. 

"The  death  of  the  King  of  England  has  everywhere 
caused  the  greatest  sensation.  .  .  .  Cousin  Victoria  is 
said  to  have  shown  astonishing  self-possession.  She 
undertakes  a  heavy  responsibility,  especially  at  the 
present  moment,  when  parties  are  so  excited,  and  alt  rest 
their  hopes  on  her."  These  words  are  an  extract  from  a 
letter  written  on  July  4th,  1837,  by  the  late  Prince  Albert, 
the  Prince  Consort  of  so  many  happy  years.  The  letter 
was  written  to  the  Prince's  father,  from  Bonn.  The  young 
Queen  had,  indeed,  behaved  with  remarkable  self-posses- 
sion. There  is  a  pretty  description,  which  has  been  often 
quoted,  but  will  bear  citing  once  more,  given  by  Miss 
Wynn,  of  the  manner  in  which  the  young  sovereign 
received  the  news  of  her  accession  to  a  throne.  The  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury,  Dr.  Howley,  and  the  Lord  Chamber- 
lain, the  Marquis  of  Conyngham,  left  Windsor  for  Kensing- 
ton Palace,  where  the  Princess  Victoria  had  been  resid- 
ing, to  inform  her  of  the  King's  death.  It  was  two  hours 
after  midnight  when  they  started,  and  they  did  not  reach 
Kensington  until  five  o'clock  in  the  morning.  "  They 
knocked,  they  rang,  they  thumped  for  a  considerable  time 
before  they  could  rouse  the  porter  at  the  gate ;  they  were 
again  kept  waiting  in  the  court-yard,  then  turned  into  one 
of  the  lower  rooms,  where  they  seemed  forgotten  by  every- 
body. They  rang  the  bell,  and  desired  that  the  attendant 
of  the  Princess  Victoria  might  be  sent  to  inform  her  Royal 


THE  KING  IS  DEAD!  LONG  LIVE  THE  QUEEN!    18 

Highness  that  they  requested  an  audience  on  business  of 
importance.  After  another  delay,  and  another  ringing 
to  inquire  the  cause,  the  attendant  was  summoned,  who 
stated  that  the  Princess  was  in  such  a  sweet  sleep  that 
she  could  not  venture  to  disturb  her.  Then  they  said, 
'  We  are  come  on  business  of  state  to  the  Queen,  and  even 
her  sleep  must  give  way  to  that.'  It  did  ;  and  to  prove 
that  she  did  not  keep  them  waiting,  in  a  few  minutes  she 
came  into  the  room  in  a  loose  white  night-gown  and 
shawl,  her  nightcap  thrown  off,  and  her  hair  falling  upon 
her  shoulders,  her  feet  in  slippers,  tears  in  her  eyes,  but 
perfectly  collected  and  dignified."  The  Prime-minister, 
Lord  Melbourne,  was  presently  sent  for,  and  a  meeting  of 
the  privy  council  summoned  for  eleven  o'clock,  when  the 
Lord  Chancellor  administered  the  usual  oaths  to  the 
Queen,  and  her  Majesty  received  in  return  the  oaths  of 
allegiance  of  the  cabinet  ministers  and  other  privy  coun- 
cillors present.  Mr.  Greville,  who  was  usually  as  little 
disposed  to  record  any  enthusiastic  admiration  of  royalty 
and  royal  personages  as  Humboldt  or  Varnhagen  von  Ense 
could  have  been,  has  described  the  scene  in  words  well 
worthy  of  quotation : 

"  The  King  died  at  twenty  minutes  after  two  yesterday 
morning,  and  the  young  Queen  met  the  council  at  Ken- 
sington Palace  at  eleven.  Never  was  anything  like  the 
first  impression  she  produced,  or  the  chorus  of  praise  and 
admiration  which  is  raised  about  her  manner  and  beha- 
vior, and  certainly  not  without  justice.  It  was  very  extraor- 
dinary, and  something  far  beyond  what  was  looked  for. 
Her  extreme  youth  and  inexperience,  and  the  ignorance  of 
the  world  concerning  her,  naturally  excited  intense  curi- 
osity to  see  how  she  would  act  on  this  trying  occasion, 
and  there  was  a  considerable  assemblage  at  the  palace, 
notwithstanding  the  short  notice  which  was  given.  The 
first  thing  to  be  done  was  to  teach  her  her  lesson,  which, 


14  A  IIISTORT  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

for  this  purpose,  Melbourne  had  himself  to  learn.  .  .  .  She 
bowed  to  the  lords,  took  her  seat,  and  then  read  her  speech 
in  a  clear,  distinct,  and  audible  voice,  and  without  any 
appearance  of  fear  or  embarrassment.  She  was  quite 
plainly  dressed,  and  in  mourning.  After  she  had  read 
her  speech,  and  taken  and  signed  the  oath  for  the  security 
of  the  Church  of  Scotland,  the  privy  councillors  were 
sworn,  the  two  royal  dukes  first  by  themselves ;  and  as 
these  two  old  men,  her  uncles,  knelt  before  her,  swearing 
allegiance  and  kissing  her  hand,  I  saw  her  blush  up  to  the 
eyes,  as  if  she  felt  the  contrast  between  their  civil  and 
their  natural  relations,  and  this  was  the  only  sign  of  emo- 
tion which  she  evinced.  Her  manner  to  them  was  very 
graceful  and  engaging ;  she  kissed  them  both,  and  rose 
from  her  chair  and  moved  toward  the  Duke  of  Sussex, 
who  was  farthest  from  her,  and  too  infirm  to  reach  her. 
She  seemed  rather  bewildered  at  the  multitude  of  men 
who  were  sworn,  and  who  came,  one  after  another,  to  kiss 
her  hand,  but  she  did  not  speak  to  anybody,  nor  did  she 
make  the  slightest  difference  in  her  manner,  or  show  any 
in  her  countenance,  to  any  individual  of  any  rank,  station, 
or  party.  I  particularly  watched  her  when  Melbourne 
and  the  ministers,  and  the  Duke  of  Wellington  and  Peel 
approached  her.  She  went  through  the  whole  ceremony, 
occasionally  looking  at  Melbourne  for  instruction  when 
she  had  any  doubt  what  to  do,  which  hardly  ever  occurred, 
and  with  perfect  calmness  and  self-possession,  but  at  the 
same  time  with  a  graceful  modesty  and  propriety  particu- 
larly interesting  and  ingratiating." 

Sir  Robert  Peel  told  Mr.  Greville  that  he  was  amazed 
at  "  her  manner  and  behavior,  at  her  apparent  deep  sense 
of  her  situation,  and  at  the  same  time  her  firmness."  The 
Duke  of  Wellington  said  in  his  blunt  way  that  if  she  had 
been  his  own  daughter  he  could  not  have  desired  to  see 
her  perform  her  part  better.  "  At  twelve,"  says  Mr.  Gre- 


THE  KING  IS  DEAD!  LONG  LIVE  THE  QUEEN!     15 

ville,  "  she  held  a  council,  at  which  she  presided  with  as 
much  ease  as  if  she  had  been  doing  nothing  else  all  her 
life ;  and  though  Lord  Lansdowne  and  my  colleague  had 
contrived,  between  them,  to  make  some  confusion  with 
the  council  papers,  she  was  not  put  out  by  it.  She  looked 
very  well ;  and  though  so  small  in  stature,  and  without 
much  pretension  to  beauty,  the  gracefulness  of  her  man- 
ner and  the  good  expression  of  her  countenance  give  her, 
on  the  whole,  a  very  agreeable  appearance,  and,  with  her 
youth,  inspire  an  excessive  interest  in  all  who  approach 
her,  and  which  I  can't  help  feeling  myself.  ...  In  short, 
she  appears  to  act  with  every  sort  of  good  taste  and  good 
feeling,  as  well  as  good  sense ;  and,  as  far  as  it  has  gone, 
nothing  can  be  more  favorable  than  the  impression  she 
has  made,  and  nothing  can  promise  better  than  her  manner 
and  conduct  do ;  though,"  Mr.  Greville  somewhat  super- 
fluously adds,  "  it  would  be  rash  to  count  too  confidently 
upon  her  judgment  and  discretion  in  more  weighty  mat- 
ters." 

The  interest  or  curiosity  with  which  the  demeanor  of 
the  young  Queen  was  watched  was  all  the  keener  because 
the  world  in  general  knew  so  little  about  her.  Not  merely 
was  the  world  in  general  thus  ignorant,  but  even  the 
statesmen  and  officials  in  closest  communication  with  court 
circles  were  in  almost  absolute  ignorance.  According  to 
Mr.  Greville,  whose  authority,  however,  is  not  to  be  taken 
too  implicitly  except  as  to  matters  which  he  actually  saw, 
the  young  Queen  had  been  previously  kept  in  such  seclu- 
sion by  her  mother — "  never,"  he  says,  "  having  slept  out 
of  her  bedroom,  nor  been  alone  with  anybody  but  herself 
and  the  Baroness  Lehzen  " — that  "  not  one  of  her  acquaint- 
ance, none  of  the  attendants  at  Kensington,  nor  even  the 
Duchess  of  Northumberland,  her  governess,  have  any  idea 
what  she  is  or  what  she  promises  to  be."  There  was 
enough  in  the  court  of  the  two  sovereigns  who  went 


16  A  IltSTORY  OF  (  UK  OWN  TIMES. 

before  Queen  Victoria  to  justify  any  strictness  of  seclusion 
which  the  Duchess  of  Kent  might  desire  for  her  daughter. 
George  IV.  was  a  Charles  II.  without  the  education  or  the 
talents ;  William  IV.  was  a  Frederick  William  of  Prussia 
without  the  genius.  The  ordinary  manners  of  the  society 
at  the  court  of  either  had  a  full  flavor,  to  put  it  in  the 
softest  way,  such  as  a  decent  tap-room  would  hardly  ex- 
hibit in  a  time  like  the  present.  No  one  can  read  even 
the  most  favorable  descriptions  given  by  contemporaries 
of  the  manners  of  those  two  courts  without  feeling  grate- 
ful to  the  Duchess  of  Kent  for  resolving  that  her  daughter 
should  see  as  little  as  possible  of  their  ways  and  their 
company. 

It  was  remarked  with  some  interest  that  the  queen  sub- 
scribed herself  simply  "  Victoria,"  and  not,  as  had  been 
expected,  "Alexandrina  Victoria."  Mr.  Greville  men- 
tions in  his  diary  of  December  24th,  1819,  that  "  the  Duke 
of  Kent  gave  the  name  of  Alexandrina  to  his  daughter  in 
compliment  to  the  Emperor  of  Russia.  She  was  to  have 
had  the  name  of  Georgiana,  but  the  Duke  insisted  upon 
Alexandrina  being  her  first  name.  The  Regent  sent  for 
Lieven  "  (the  Russian  ambassador,  husband  of  the  famous 
Princess  de  Lieven),  "  and  made  him  a  great  many  com- 
pliments, en  le  persiflant,  on  the  Emperor's  being  godfather, 
but  informed  him  that  the  name  of  Georgiana  could  be 
second  to  no  other  in  this  country,  and  therefore  she  could 
not  bear  it  at  all."  It  was  a  very  wise  choice  to  employ 
simply  the  name  of  Victoria,  around  which  no  ungenial 
associations  of  any  kind  hung  at  that  time,  and  which  can 
have  only  grateful  associations  in  the  history  of  this  coun- 
try for  the  future. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  go  into  any  formal  description  of 
the  various  ceremonials  and  pageantries  which  celebrated 
the  accession  of  the  new  sovereign.  The  proclamation  of 
the  Queen,  her  appearance  for  the  first  time  on  the  throne 


THE  KING  IS  DEAD!    ^ONG  LIVE  TUE  QUEEN!     17 

ill  the  House  of  Lords  when  she  prorogued  Parliament  in 
person,  and  even  the  gorgeous  festival  of  her  coronation, 
which  took  place  on  June  28th,  in  the  following  year,  1838, 
may  be  passed  over  with  a  mere  word  of  record.  It  is 
worth  mentioning,  however,  that  at  the  coronation  proces- 
sion one  of  the  most  conspicuous  figures  was  that  of 
Marsha]  Soult,  Duke  of  Dalmatia,  the  opponent  of  Moore 
and  Wellington  in  the  Peninsula,  the  commander  of  the 
Old  Guard  at  Ltitzen,  and  one  of  the  strong  arms  of 
Napoleon  at  Waterloo.  Soult  had  been  sent  as  ambas- 
sador-extraordinary to  represent  the  French  Government 
and  people  at  the  coronation  of  Queen  Victoria,  and  noth- 
ing could  exceed  the  enthusiasm  with  which  he  was 
received  by  the  crowds  in  the  streets  of  London  on  that 
day.  The  white-haired  soldier  was  cheered  wherever  a 
glimpse  of  his  face  or  figure  could  be  caught.  He 
appeared  in  the  procession  in  a  carriage,  the  frame  of 
which  had  been  used  on  occasions  of  state  by  some  of  the 
Princes  of  the  House  of  Conde,  and  which  Soult  had  had 
splendidly  decorated  for  the  ceremony  of  the  coronation. 
Even  the  Austrian  ambassador,  says  an  eye-witness, 
attracted  less  attention  than  Soult,  although  the  dress  of 
the  Austrian,  Prince  Esterhazy,  "  down  to  his  very  boot- 
heels,  sparkled  with  diamonds."  The  comparison  savors 
now  of  the  ridiculous,  but  is  remarkably  expressive  and 
effective.  Prince  Esterhazy's  name  in  those  days  sug- 
gested nothing  but  diamonds.  His  diamonds  may  be  said 
to  glitter  through  all  the  light  literature  of  the  time. 
When  Lady  Mary  Wortley  Montagu  wanted  a  com- 
parison with  which  to  illustrate  excessive  splendor  and 
brightness,  she  found  it  in  "Mr.  Pitt's  diamonds." 
Prince  Esterhazy's  served  the  same  purpose  for  the 
writers  of  the  early  years  of  the  present  reign.  It  was, 
therefore,  perhaps,  no  very  poor  tribute  to  the  stout  old 
moustache  of  the  Republic  and  the  Empire  to  say  that  at 

2 


18  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

a  London  pageant  his  war-worn  face  drew  attention  away 
from  Prince  Esterhazy's  diamonds.  Soult,  himself,  felt 
very  warmly  the  genuine  kindness  of  the  reception  given 
to  him.  Years  after,  in  a  debate  in  the  French  Chamber, 
when  M.  Guizot  was  accused  of  too  much  partiality  for 
the  English  alliance,  Marshal  Soult  declared  himself  a 
warm  champion  of  that  alliance.  "  I  fought  the  English 
down  to  Toulouse,"  he  said,  "  when  I  fired  the  last  cannon 
in  defence  of  the  national  independence;  in  the  mean- 
time I  have  been  in  London,  and  France  knows  the  recep- 
tion which  I  had  there.  The  English  themselves  cried 
*  Vive  Soult ! ' — they  cried  '  Soult  forever ! '  I  had  learned 
to  estimate  the  English  on  the  field  of  battle;  I  have 
learned  to  estimate  them  in  peace ;  and  I  repeat  that  I  am 
a  warm  partisan  of  the  English  alliance."  History  is 
not  exclusively  made  by  cabinets  and  professional  diplo- 
matists. It  is  highly  probable  that  the  cheers  of  a  Lon- 
don crowd  on  the  day  of  the  Queen's  coronation  did 
something  genuine  and  substantial  to  restore  the  good 
feeling  between  this  country  and  France,  and  efface  the 
bitter  memories  of  Waterloo. 

It  is  a  fact  well  worthy  of  note,  amidst  whatever 
records  of  court  ceremonials  and  of  political  change,  that 
a  few  days  after  the  accession  of  the  Queen,  Mr.  Monte- 
fiore  was  elected  Sheriff  of  London,  the  first  Jew  who  had 
ever  been  chosen  for  that  office ;  and  that  he  received 
knighthood  at  the  hands  of  her  Majesty  when  she  visited 
the  City  on  the  following  Lord  Mayor's  day.  He  was  the 
first  Jew  whom  royalty  had  honored  in  this  country  since 
the  good  old  times  when  royalty  was  pleased  to  borrow 
the  Jew's  money,  or  order  instead  the  extraction  of  his 
teeth.  The  expansion  of  the  principle  of  religious  liberty 
and  equality,  which  has  been  one  of  the  most  remark- 
able characteristics  of  the  reign  of  Queen  Victoria,  could 
hardly  have  been  more  becomingly  inaugurated  than  by 


19 

the  compliment  which  sovereign  and  city  paid  to  Sir 
Moses  Montefiore. 

The  first  signature  attached  to  the  Act  of  Allegiance 
presented  to  the  Queen  at  Kensington  Palace  was  that 
of  her  eldest  surviving  uncle,  Ernest,  Duke  of  Cumber- 
land. The  fact  may  be  taken  as  an  excuse  for  intro- 
ducing a  few  words  here  to  record  the  severance  that 
then  took  place  between  the  interests  of  this  country,  or 
at  least  the  reigning  family  of  these  realms,  and  another 
state,  which  had  for  a  long  time  been  bound  up  together 
in  a  manner  seldom  satisfactory  to  the  English  people. 
In  the  whole  history  of  England  it  will  be  observed  that 
few  things  have  provoked  greater  popular  dissatisfaction 
than  the  connection  of  a  reigning  family  with  the  crown 
or  rulership  of  some  foreign  state.  There  is  an  instinc- 
tive jealousy  on  such  a  point,  which,  even  when  it  is 
unreasonable,  is  not  unnatural.  A  sovereign  of  England 
had  better  be  sovereign  of  England,  and  of  no  foreign  state. 
Many  favorable  auspices  attended  the  accession  of  Queen 
Victoria  to  the  throne  ;  some  at  least  of  these  were  associ- 
ated with  her  sex.  The  country  was  in  general  disposed 
to  think  that  the  accession  of  a  woman  to  the  throne  would 
somewhat  clarify  and  purify  the  atmosphere  of  the  court. 
It  had  another  good  effect  as  well,  and  one  of  a  strictly 
political  nature.  It  severed  the  connection  which  had 
existed  for  some  generations  between  this  country  and 
Hanover.  The  connection  was  only  personal,  the  succes- 
sive kings  of  England  being  also  by  succession  sovereigns 
of  Hanover. 

The  crown  of  Hanover  was  limited  in  its  descent  to  the 
male  line,  and  it  passed  on  the  death  of  William  IV.  to  his 
eldest  surviving  brother,  Ernest,  Duke  of  Cumberland. 
The  change  was  in  almost  every  way  satisfactory  to  the 
English  people.  The  indirect  connection  between  Eng- 
land and  Hanover  had  at  no  time  been  a  matter  of  gratifi- 


20  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

cation  to  the  public  of  this  country.  Many  cooler  and 
more  enlightened  persons  than  honest  Squire  Western 
had  viewed  with  disfavor,  and  at  one  time  with  distrust, 
the  division  of  interests  which  the  ownership  of  the  two 
crowns  seemed  almost  of  necessity  to  create  in  our  English 
sovereigns.  Besides,  it  must  be  owned  that  the  people  of 
this  country  were  not  by  any  means  sorry  to  be  rid  of  the 
Duke  of  Cumberland.  Not  many  of  George  III.'s  sons 
were  popular  :  the  Duke  of  Cumberland  was  probably  the 
least  popular  of  all.  He  was  believed  by  many  persons  to 
have  had  something  more  than  an  indirect,  or  passive,  or 
innocent  share  in  the  Orange  plot,  discovered  and  exposed 
by  Joseph  Hume  in  1835,  for  setting  aside  the  claims  of  the 
young  Princess  Victoria,  and  putting  himself,  the  Duke  of 
Cumberland,  on  the  throne ;  a  scheme  which  its  authors 
pretended  to  justify  by  the  preposterous  assertion  that  they 
feared  the  Duke  of  Wellington  would  otherwise  seize  the 
crown  for  himself.  His  manners  were  rude,  overbearing, 
and  sometimes  even  brutal.  He  had  personal  habits  which 
seemed  rather  fitted  for  the  days  of  Tiberius,  or  for  the 
court  of  Peter  the  Great,  than  for  the  time  and  sphere  to 
which  he  belonged.  Rumor  not  unnaturally  exaggerated 
his  defects,  and  in  the  mouths  of  many  his  name  was  the 
symbol  of  the  darkest  and  fiercest  passions,  and  even 
crimes.  Some  of  the  popular  reports  with  regard  to  him 
had  their  foundation  only  in  the  common  detestation  of  his 
character  and  dread  of  his  influence ;  but  it  is  certain  that 
he  was  profligate,  selfish,  overbearing,  and  quarrelsome. 
A  man  with  these  qualities  would  usually  be  described 
in  fiction  as  at  all  events  bluntly  honest  and  outspoken  ; 
but  the  Duke  of  Cumberland  was  deceitful  and  treacher- 
ous. He  was  outspoken  in  his  abuse  of  those  with  whom 
he  quarrelled,  and  in  his  style  of  anecdote  and  jocular  con- 
versation ;  but  in  no  other  sense.  The  Duke  of  Welling- 
ton, whom  he  hated,  told  Mr.  Greville  that  he  once  asked 


THE  KING  IS  DEAD!  LONG  LIVE  THE  QUEEN  !    21 

George  IV.  why  the  Duke  of  Cumberland  was  so  unpopu- 
lar, and  the  King  replied,  "  Because  there  never  was  a 
father  well  with  his  son,  or  husband  with  his  wife,  or 
lover  with  his  mistress,  or  friend  with  his  friend,  that  he 
did  not  try  to  make  mischief  between  them."  The  first 
thing  he  did  on  his  accession  to  the  throne  of  Hanover 
was  to  abrogate  the  constitution  which  had  been  agreed 
to  by  the  Estates  of  the  kingdom,  and  sanctioned  by  the 
late  King,  William  IV.  "  Radicalism,"  said  the  King, 
writing  to  an  English  nobleman,  "  has  been  here  all  the 
order  of  the  day,  and  all  the  lower  class  appointed  to 
office  were  more  or  less  imbued  with  these  laudable  prin- 
ciples. .  .  .  But  I  have  cut  the  wings  of  this  democracy." 
He  went,  indeed,  pretty  vigorously  to  work,  for  he  dis- 
missed from  their  offices  seven  of  the  most  distinguished 
professors  of  the  University  of  Gottingen,  because  they 
signed  a  protest  against  his  arbitrary  abrogation  of  the 
constitution.  Among  the  men  thus  pushed  from  their 
stools  were — Gervinus,  the  celebrated  historian  and  Shak- 
spearian  critic,  at  that  time  professor  of  history  and  litera- 
ture ;  Ewald,  the  Orientalist  and  theologian ;  Jacob  Grimm ; 
and  Frederick  Dahlmann,  professor  of  political  science. 
Gervinus,  Grimm,  and  Dahlmann  were  not  merely  de- 
prived of  their  offices,  but  were  actually  sent  into  exile. 
The  exiles  were  accompanied  across  the  frontier  by  an 
immense  concourse  of  students,  who  gave  them  a  trium- 
phant Geleit  in  true  student  fashion,  and  converted  what 
was  meant  for  degradation  and  punishment  into  a  pro- 
cession of  honor.  The  offence  against  all  rational  prin- 
ciples of  civil  government  in  these  arbitrary  proceedings 
on  the  part  of  the  new  King  was  the  more  flagrant  because 
it  could  not  even  be  pretended  that  the  professors  were 
interfering  with  political  matters  outside  their  province, 
or  that  they  were  issuing  manifestoes  calculated  to  dis- 
turb the  public  peace.  The  University  of  Gottingen  at 


22  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

that  time  sent  a  representative  to  the  Estates  of  the  king- 
dom, and  the  protest  to  which  the  seven  professors  at- 
tached their  names  was  addressed  to  the  academical  senate, 
and  simply  declared  that  they  would  take  no  part  in  the 
ensiling  election,  because  of  the  suspension  of  the  con- 
stitution. All  this  led  to  somewhat  serious  disturbances 
in  Hanover,  which  it  needed  the  employment  of  military 
force  to  suppress. 

It  was  felt  in  England  that  the  mere  departure  of  the 
Duke  of  Cumberland  from  this  country  would  have  made 
the  severance  of  the  connection  with  Hanover  desirable, 
even  if  it  had  not  been  in  other  ways  an  advantage  to  us. 
Later  times  have  shown  how  much  we  have  gained  by 
the  separation.  It  would  have  been  exceedingly  incon- 
venient, to  say  the  least,  if  the  crown  worn  by  a  sovereign 
of  England  had  been  hazarded  in  the  war  between  Austria 
and  Prussia  in  1866.  Our  reigning  family  must  have 
seemed  to  suffer  in  dignity  if  that  crown  had  been  roughly 
knocked  off  the  head  of  its  wearer,  who  happened  to  be 
an  English  sovereign ;  and  it  would  have  been  absurd  to 
expect  that  the  English  people  could  engage  in  a  quarrel 
with  which  their  interests  and  honor  had  absolutely  noth- 
ing to  do,  for  the  sake  of  a  mere  family  possession  of  their 
ruling  house.  Looking  back  from  this  distance  of  time, 
and  across  a  change  of  political  and  social  manners  far 
greater  than  the  distance  of  time  might  seem  to  explain, 
it  appears  difficult  to  understand  the  passionate  emotions 
which  the  accession  of  the  young  Queen  seems  to  have 
excited  on  all  sides.  Some  influential  and  prominent 
politicians  talked  and  wrote  as  if  there  were  really  a  pos- 
sibility of  the  Tories  attempting  a  revolution  in  favor  of 
the  Hanoverian  branch  of  the  royal  family ;  and  if  some 
such  crisis  had  again  come  round  as  that  which  tried  the 
nation  when  Queen  Anne  died.  On  the  other  hand,  there 
were  heard  loud  and  shrill  cries  that  the  Queen  was  des- 


THE  KING  IS  DEAD!  LONG  LIVE  THE  QUEEN!    23 

tined  to  be  conducted  by  her  constitutional  advisers  into 
a  precipitate  pathway  leading  sheer  down  into  popery 
and  anarchy.  The  Times  insisted  that  "  the  anticipations 
of  certain  Irish  Roman  Catholics  respecting  the  success 
of  their  warfare  against  Church  and  State  under  the  aus- 
pices of  these  not  untried  ministers,  into  whose  hands  the 
all  but  infant  Queen  has  been  compelled  by  her  unhappy 
condition  to  deliver  herself  and  her  indignant  people,  are 
to  be  taken  for  nothing,  and  as  nothing,  but  the  chimeras 
of  a  band  of  visionary  traitors."  The  Times  even  thought 
it  necessary  to  point  out  that  for  her  Majesty  to  turn  papist, 
to  marry  a  papist,  "  or  in  any  manner  follow  the  footsteps 
of  the  Coburg  family,  whom  these  incendiaries  describe 
as  papists,"  would  involve  an  "immediate  forfeiture  of  the 
British  crown."  On  the  other  hand,  some  of  the  Radical 
and  more  especially  Irish  papers  talked  in  the  plainest  terms 
of  Tory  plots  to  depose,  or  even  to  assassinate,  the  Queen, 
and  put  the  Duke  of  Cumberland  in  her  place.  O'Connell, 
the  great  Irish  agitator,  declared  in  a  public  speech  that 
if  it  were  necessary  he  could  get  "  five  hundred  thousand 
brave  Irishmen  to  defend  the  life,  the  honor,  and  the  per- 
son of  the  beloved  young  lady  by  whom  England's  throne 
is  now  filled."  Mr.  Henry  Grattan,  the  son  of  the  famous 
orator,  and  like  his  father  a  Protestant,  declared,  at  a 
meeting  in  Dublin,  that  "  if  her  Majesty  were  once  fairly 
placed  in  the  hands  of  the  Tories,  I  would  not  give  an 
orange-peel  for  her  life."  He  even  went  on  to  put  his 
rhetorical  declaration  into  a  more  distinct  form:  "  If 
some  of  the  low  miscreants  of  the  party  got  round  her 
Majesty,  and  had  the  mixing  of  the  royal  bowl  at  night,  I 
fear  she  would  have  a  long  sleep."  This  language  seems 
almost  too  absurd  for  sober  record,  and  yet  was  hardly 
more  absurd  than  many  things  said  on  what  may  be 
called  the  other  side.  A  Mr.  Bradshaw,  Tory  member  for 
Canterbury,  declared  at  a  public  meeting  in  that  ancient 


24  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

city  that  the  sheet-anchor  of  the  Liberal  Ministry  was  the 
body  of  "  Irish  papists  and  rapparees  whom  the  priests 
return  to  the  House  of  Commons."  "  These  are  the  men 
who  represent  the  bigoted  savages,  hardly  more  civilized 
than  the  natives  of  New  Zealand,  but  animated  with  a 
fierce,  undying  hatred  of  England.  Yet  on  these  men  are 
bestowed  the  countenance  and  support  of  the  Queen  of 
Protestant  England.  For,  alas !  her  Majesty  is  Queen 
only  of  a  faction,  and  is  as  much  of  a  partisan  as  the  Lord 
Chancellor  himself."  At  a  Conservative  dinner  in  Lan- 
cashire, a  speaker  denounced  the  Queen  and  her  ministers 
on  the  same  ground  so  vehemently,  that  the  Commander- 
in-chief  addressed  a  remonstrance  to  some  military 
officers  who  were  amongst  the  guests  at  this  excited  ban- 
quet, pointing  out  to  them  the  serious  responsibility  they 
incurred  by  remaining  in  any  assembly  when  such  lan- 
guage was  uttered  and  such  sentiments  were  expressed. 

No  one,  of  course,  would  take  impassioned  and  inflated 
harangues  of  this  kind  on  either  side  as  a  representation 
of  the  general  feeling.  Sober  persons  all  over  the  country 
must  have  known  perfectly  well  that  there  was  not  the 
slightest  fear  that  the  young  Queen  would  turn  a  Roman 
Catholic,  or  that  her  ministry  intended  to  deliver  the 
country  up  as  a  prey  to  Rome.  Sober  persons  every- 
where, too,  must  have  known  equally  well  that  there  was 
no  longer  the  slightest  cause  to  feel  any  alarm  about  a  Tory 
plot  to  hand  over  the  throne  of  England  to  the  detested 
Duke  of  Cumberland.  We  only  desire,  in  quoting  such 
outrageous  declarations,  to  make  more  clear  the  condition 
of  the  public  mind,  and  to  show  what  the  state  of  the 
political  world  must  have  been  when  such  extravagance 
and  such  delusions  were  possible.  "We  have  done  this 
partly  to  show  what  were  the  trials  and  difficulties  under 
which  her  Majesty  came  to  the  throne,  and  partly  for  the 
mere  purpose  of  illustrating  the  condition  of  the  country 


THE  KING  IS  DEAD!  LONG  LIVE  THE  QUEEN!    25 

and  of  political  education.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  all 
over  the  country  passion  and  ignorance  were  at  work  to 
make  the  task  of  constitutional  government  peculiarly 
difficult.  A  vast  number  of  the  followers  of  the  Tories 
in  country  places  really  believed  that  the  Liberals  were 
determined  to  hurry  the  sovereign  into  some  policy  tend- 
ing to  the  degradation  of  the  monarchy.  If  any  cool  and 
enlightened  reasoner  were  to  argue  with  them  on  this 
point,  and  endeavor  to  convince  them  of  the  folly  of 
ascribing  such  purposes  to  a  number  of  English  statesmen 
whose  interests,  position,  and  honor  were  absolutely 
bound  up  with  the  success  and  the  glory  of  the  State,  the 
indignant  and  unreasoning  Tories  would  be  able  to  cite 
the  very  words  of  so  great  and  so  sober-minded  a  states- 
man as  Sir  Robert  Peel,  who,  in  his  famous  speech  to  the 
electors  of  Tamworth,  promised  to  rescue  the  constitution 
from  being  made  the  "  victim  of  false  friends,"  and  the 
country  from  being  "trampled  under  the  hoof  of  a 
ruthless  democracy."  If,  on  the  other  hand,  a  sensible 
person  were  to  try  to  persuade  hot-headed  people  on  the 
opposite  side  that  it  was  absurd  to  suppose  the  Tories 
really  meant  any  harm  to  the  freedom  and  the  peace  of 
the  country  and  the  security  of  the  succession,  he  might 
be  invited,  with  significant  expression,  to  read  the 
manifesto  issued  by  Lord  Durham  to  the  electors  of 
Sunderland,  in  which  that  eminent  statesman  declared 
that  "  in  all  circumstances,  at  all  hazards,  be  the  personal 
consequences  what  they  may,"  he  would  ever  be  found 
ready  when  called  upon  to  defend  the  principles  on  which 
the  constitution  of  the  country  was  then  settled.  We  know 
now  very  well  that  Sir  Robert  Peel  and  Lord  Durham 
were  using  the  language  of  innocent  metaphor.  Sir 
Robert  Peel  did  not  really  fear  much  the  hoof  of  the 
ruthless  democracy ;  Lord  Durham  did  not  actually  expect 
to  be  called  upon  at  any  terrible  risk  to  himself  to  fight 


26  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

the  battle  of  freedom  on  English  soil.  But  when  those 
whose  minds  had  been  bewildered  and  whose  passions  had 
been  inflamed  by  the  language  of  the  Times  on  the  one 
side,  and  that  of  O'Connell  on  the  other,  came  to  read  the 
calmer  and  yet  sufficiently  impassioned  words  of  respon- 
sible statesmen  like  Sir  Robert  Peel  and  Lord  Durham, 
•they  might  be  excused  if  they  found  rather  a  confirmation 
than  a  refutation  of  their  arguments  and  their  fears. 

The  truth  is  that  the  country  was  in  a  very  excited  con- 
dition, and  that  it  is  easy  to  imagine  a  succession  of  events 
which  might  in  a  moment  have  thrown  it  into  utter 
confusion.  At  home  and  abroad  things  were  looking 
ominous  for  the  new  reign.  To  begin  with,  the  last  two 
reigns  had,  on  the  whole,  done  much  to  loosen,  not  only  the 
personal  feeling  of  allegiance,  but  even  the  general  con- 
fidence in  the  virtue  of  monarchical  rule.  The  old  plan 
of  personal  government  had  become  an  anomaly,  and  the 
system  of  a  genuine  constitutional  government,  such  as  we 
know,  had  not  yet  been  tried.  The  very  manner  in  which 
the  Reform  Bill  had  been  carried,  the  political  stratagem 
which  had  been  resorted  to  when  further  resistance 
seemed  dangerous,  was  not  likely  to  exalt  in  popular 
estimate  the  value  of  what  was  then  gracefully  called 
constitutional  government.  Only  a  short  time  before, 
the  country  had  seen  Catholic  emancipation  conceded, 
not  from  a  sense  of  justice  on  the  part  of  ministers,  but 
avowedly  because  further  resistance  must  lead  to  civil 
disturbance.  There  was  not  much  in  all  this  to  impress 
an  intelligent  and  independent  people  with  a  sense  of  the 
great  wisdom  of  the  rulers  of  the  country,  or  of  the  indis- 
pensable advantages  of  the  system  which  they  represented. 
Social  discontent  prevailed  almost  everywhere.  Economic 
laws  were  hardly  understood  by  the  country  in  general. 
Class  interests  were  fiercely  arrayed  against  each  other. 
The  cause  of  each  man's  class  filled  him  with  a  positive 


THE  KING  IS  DEAD!  LONG  LIVE  THE  QUEEN!    27 

fanaticism.  He  was  not  a  mere  selfish  and  grasping 
partisan,  but  he  sincerely  believed  that  each  other  class 
was  arrayed  against  his,  and  that  the  natural  duty  of 
self-defence  and  self-preservation  compelled  him  to  stand 
firmly  by  his  own. 


28  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 


CHAPTER  II. 

STATESMEN  AND   PAETIE8. 

LORD  MELBOURNE  was  the  First  Minister  of  the  Crown 
when  the  Queen  succeeded  to  the  throne.  He  was  a  man 
who  then  and  always  after  made  himself  particularly  dear 
to  the  Queen,  and  for  whom  she  had  the  strongest  regard. 
He  was  of  kindly,  somewhat  indolent  nature;  fair  and 
even  generous  toward  his  political  opponents ;  of  the  most 
genial  disposition  toward  his  friends.  He  was  emphati- 
cally not  a  strong  man.  He  was  not  a  man  to  make  good 
grow  where  it  was  not  already  growing,  to  adopt  the 
expression  of  a  great  author.  Long  before  that  time  his 
eccentric  wife,  Lady  Caroline  Lamb,  had  excused  herself 
for  some  of  her  follies  and  frailties 'by  pleading  that  her 
husband  was  not  a  man  to  watch  over  any  one's  morals. 
He  was  a  kindly  counsellor  to  a  young  Queen ;  and,  hap- 
pily for  herself,  the  young  Queen  in  this  case  had  strong, 
clear  sense  enough  of  her  own  not  to  be  absolutely 
dependent  on  any  counsel.  Lord  Melbourne  was  not  a 
statesman.  His  best  qualities,  personal  kindness  and 
good-nature  apart,  were  purely  negative.  He  was  unfor- 
tunately not  content  even  with  the  reputation  for  a  sort 
of  indolent  good-nature  which  he  might  have  well  de- 
served :  he  strove  to  make  himself  appear  hopelessly  idle, 
trivial,  and  careless.  When  he  really  was  serious  and 
earnest,  he  seemed  to  make  it  his  business  to  look  like  one 
in  whom  no  human  affairs  could  call  up  a  gleam  of  inter- 


STATESMEN  AND  PARTIES.  29 

est.  He  became  the  fanfaron  of  levities  which,  he  never 
had.  We  have  amusing  pictures  of  him  as  he  occupied 
himself  in  blowing  a  feather  or  nursing  a  sofa-cushion 
while  receiving  an  important  and  perhaps  highly  sensi- 
tive deputation  from  this  or  that  commercial  "  interest." 
Those  who  knew  him  insisted  that  he  really  was  listening 
with  all  his  might  and  main ;  that  he  had  sat  up  the 
whole  night  before,  studying  the  question  which  he 
seemed  to  think  so  unworthy  of  any  attention  ;  and  that, 
so  far  from  being,  like  Horace,  wholly  absorbed  in  his 
trifles,  he  was  at  very  great  pains  to  keep  up  the  appear- 
ance of  a  trifler.  A  brilliant  critic  has  made  a  lively  and 
amusing  attack  on  this  alleged  peculiarity.  "  If  the  truth 
must  be  told,"  says  Sydney  Smith,  "  our  viscount  is  some- 
what of  an  impostor.  Everything  about  him  seems  to 
betoken  careless  desolation ;  any  one  would  suppose  from 
his  manner  that  he  was  playing  at  chuck-farthing  with 
human  happiness  ;  that  he  was  always  on  the  heel  of  pas- 
time ;  that  he  would  giggle  away  the  Great  Charter,  and 
decide  by  the  method  of  teetotum  whether  my  lords  the 
bishops  should  or  should  not  retain  their  seats  in  the 
House  of  Lords.  All  this  is  but  the  mere  vanity  of  sur- 
prising, and  making  us  believe  that  he  can  play  with 
kingdoms  as  other  men  can  with  ninepins.  ...  I  am 
sorry  to  hurt  any  man's  feelings,  and  to  brush  away  the 
magnificent  fabric  of  levity  and  gayety  he  has  reared; 
but  I  accuse  our  minister  of  honesty  and  diligence;  I 
deny  that  he  is  careless  or  rash :  he  is  nothing  more  than 
a  man  of  good  understanding  and  good  principle  disguised 
in  the  eternal  and  somewhat  wearisome  affectation  of  a 
political  roue" 

Such  a  masquerading  might  perhaps  have  been  excu- 
sable, or  even  attractive,  in  the  case  of  a  man  of  really 
brilliant  and  commanding  talents.  Lookers-on  are  always 
rather  apt  to  be  fascinated  by  the  spectacle  of  a  man  of 


30  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

well  recognized  strength  and  force  of  character  playing 
for  the  moment  the  part  of  an  indolent  trifler.  The  con- 
trast is  charming  in  a  brilliant  Prince  Hal  or  such  a  Sar- 
danapalus  as  Byron  drew.  In  our  own  time  a  consider- 
able amount  of  the  popularity  of  Lord  Palmerston  was  in- 
spired by  the  amusing  antagonism  between  his  assumed 
levity  and  his  well-known  force  of  intellect  and  strength 
of  will.  But  in  Lord  Melbourne's  case  the  affectation 
had  no  such  excuse  or  happy  effect.  He  was  not  by  any 
means  a  Palmerston.  He  was  only  fitted  to  rule  in  the 
quietest  times.  He  was  a  poor  speaker,  utterly  unable  to 
encounter  the  keen,  penetrating  criticisms  of  Lyndhurst 
or  the  vehement  and  remorseless  invectives  of  Brougham. 
Debates  were  then  conducted  with  a  bitterness  of  person- 
ality unknown,  or  at  all  events  very  rarely  known,  in  our 
days.  Even  in  the  House  of  Lords  language  was  often 
interchanged  of  the  most  virulent  hostility.  The  rushing 
impetuosity  and  fury  of  Brougham's  style  had  done  much 
then  to  inflame  the  atmosphere  which  in  our  days  is 
usually  so  cool  and  moderate. 

It  probably  added  to  the  warmth  of  the  attacks  on  the 
ministry  of  Lord  Melbourne  that  the  Prime-minister  was 
supposed  to  be  an  especial  favorite  with  the  young  Queen. 
When  Victoria  came  to  the  throne  the  Duke  of  Welling- 
ton gave  frank  expression  to  his  feelings  as  to  the  future 
of  his  party.  He  was  of  opinion  that  the  Tories  would 
never  have  any  chance  with  a  young  woman  for  a  sover- 
eign. "  I  have  no  small-talk,"  lie  said,  "  and  Peel  has  no 
manners."  It  had  probably  not  occurred  to  the  Duke  of 
Wellington  to  think  that  a  woman  could  be  capable  of  as 
sound  a  constitutional  policy,  and  could  show  as  little 
regard  for  personal  predilections  in  the  business  of  govern- 
ment, as  any  man.  All  this,  however,  only  tended  to  em- 
bitter the  feeling  against  the  Whig  government.  Lord 
Melbourne's  constant  attendance  on  the  young  Queen  was 


STATESMEN  AND  PARTIES.  31 

regarded  with  keen  jealousy  and  dissatisfaction.  Accord- 
ing to  some  critics,  the  Prime-minister  was  endeavoring 
to  inspire  her  with  all  his  own  gay  heedlessness  of  char- 
acter and  temperament.  According  to  others,  Lord  Mel- 
bourne's purpose  was  to  make  himself  agreeable  and  indis- 
pensable to  the  Queen ;  to  surround  her  with  his  friends, 
relations,  and  creatures,  and  thus  get  a  lifelong  hold  of 
power  in  England,  in  defiance  of  political  changes  and 
parties.  It  is  curious  now  to  look  back  on  much  that  was 
said  in  the  political  and  personal  heats  and  bitternesses  of 
the  time.  If  Lord  Melbourne  had  been  a  French  mayor  of 
the  palace,  whose  real  object  was  to  make  himself  virtual 
ruler  of  the  state,  and  to  hold  the  sovereign  as  a  puppet  in 
his  hands,  there  could  not  have  been  greater  anger,  fear, 
and  jealousy.  Since  that  time  we  have  all  learned  on  the 
very  best  authority  that  Lord  Melbourne  actually  was 
himself  the  person  to  advise  the  Queen  to  show  some  con- 
fidence in  the  Tories — to  "  hold  out  the  olive-branch  a  little 
to  them,"  as  he  expressed  it.  He  does  not  appear  to  have 
been  greedy  of  power,  or  to  have  used  any  unfair  means 
of  getting  or  keeping  it.  The  character  of  the  young  sov- 
ereign seems  to  have  impressed  him  deeply.  His  real  or 
affected  levity  gave  way  to  a  genuine  and  lasting  desire  to 
make  her  life  as  happy,  and  her  reign  as  successful,  as  he 
could.  The  Queen  always  felt  the  warmest  affection  and 
gratitude  for  him,  and  showed  it  long  after  the  public  had 
given  up  the  suspicion  that  she  could  be  a  puppet  in  the 
hands  of  a  minister. 

Still,  it  is  certain  that  the  Queen's  Prime-minister  was 
by  no  means  a  popular  man  at  the  time  of  her  accession. 
Even  observers  who  had  no  political  or  personal  interest 
whatever  in  the  conditions  of  cabinets  were  displeased  to 
see  the  opening  of  the  new  reign  so  much,  to  all  appear- 
ance, under  the  influence  of  one  who  either  was  or  tried 
to  be  a  mere  lounger.  The  deputations  went  away 


32  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

offended  and  disgusted  when  Lord  Melbourne  played 
with  feathers  or  dandled  sofa-cushions  in  their  presence. 
The  almost  fierce  energy  and  strenuousness  of  a  man 
like  Brougham  showed  in  overwhelming  contrast  to  the 
happy-go-lucky  airs  and  graces  of  the  Premier.  It  is 
likely  that  there  was  quite  as  much  of  affectation  in  the 
one  case  as  in  the  other ;  but  the  affectation  of  a  devour- 
ing zeal  for  the  public  service  told  at  least  far  better  than 
the  other  in  the  heat  and  stress  of  debate.  When  the  new 
reign  began,  the  ministry  had  two  enemies  or  critics  in 
the  House  of  Lords  of  the  most  formidable  character. 
Either  alone  would  have  been  a  trouble  to  a  minister  of 
far  stronger  mould  than  Lord  Melbourne;  but  circum- 
stances threw  them  both,  for  the  moment,  into  a  chance 
alliance  against  him. 

One  of  these  was  Lord  Brougham.  Xo  stronger  and 
stranger  a  figure  than  his  is  described  in  the  modern  his- 
tory of  England.  He  was  gifted  with  the  most  varied  and 
striking  talents,  and  with  capacity  for  labor  which  some- 
times seemed  almost  superhuman.  Not  merely  had  he 
the  capacity  for  labor,  but  he  appeared  to  have  a  positive 
passion  for  work.  His  restless  energy  seemed  as  if  it 
must  stretch  itself  out  on  every  side  seeking  new  fields  of 
conquest.  The  study  that  was  enough  to  occupy  the 
whole  time  and  wear  out  the  frame  of  other  men  was  only 
recreation  to  him.  He  might  have  been  described  as  one 
possessed  by  a  very  demon  of  work.  His  physical  strength 
never  gave  way.  His  high  spirits  never  deserted  him. 
His  self-confidence  was  boundless.  He  thought  he  knew 
everything,  and  could  do  everything  better  than  any  other 
man.  He  delighted  in  giving  evidence  that  he  understood 
the  business  of  the  specialist  better  than  the  specialist 
himself.  His  vanity  was  overweening,  and  made  him 
ridiculous  almost  as  often  and  as  much  as  his  genius  made 
him  admired.  The  comic  literature  of  more  than  a  gen- 


L.DHD  BROUGHAM. 


STATESMEN  AND  PARTIES.  33 

eration  had  no  subject  more  fruitful  than  the  vanity  and 
restlessness  of  Lord  Brougham.  He  was  beyond  doubt  a 
great  Parliamentary  orator.  His  style  was  too  diffuse  and 
sometimes  too  uncouth  to  suit  a  day  like  our  own,  when 
form  counts  for  more  than  substance,  when  passion  seems 
out  of  place  in  debate,  and  not  to  exaggerate  is  far  more 
the  object  than  to  try  to  be  great.  Brougham's  action 
was  wild,  and  sometimes  even  furious ;  his  gestures  were 
singularly  ungraceful ;  his  manners  were  grotesque  ;  but 
of  his  power  over  his  hearers  there  could  be  no  doubt. 
That  power  remained  with  him  until  a  far  later  date; 
and  long  after  the  years  when  men  usually  continue  to 
take  part  in  political  debate,  Lord  Brougham  could  be 
impassioned,  impressive,  and  even  overwhelming.  He  was 
not  an  orator  of  the  highest  class  :  his  speeches  have  not 
stood  the  test  of  time.  Apart  from  the  circumstances  of 
the  hour  and  the  personal  power  of  the  speaker,  they  could 
hardly  arouse  any  great  delight,  or  even  interest;  for 
they  are  by  no  means  models  of  English  style,  and  they 
have  little  of  that  profound  philosophical  interest,  that 
pregnancy  of  thought  and  meaning,  and  that  splendor  of 
eloquence,  which  make  the  speeches  of  Burke  always 
classic,  and  even  in  a  certain  sense  always  popular  among 
us.  In  truth,  no  man  could  have  done  with  abiding  success 
all  the  things  which  Brougham  did  successfully  for  the 
hour.  On  law,  on  politics,  on  literature,  on  languages,  on 
science,  on  art,  on  industrial  and  commercial  enterprise, 
he  professed  to  pronounce  with  the  authority  of  a  teacher. 
"  If  Brougham  knew  a  little  of  law,"  said  O'Connell,  when 
the  former  became  Lord  Chancellor,  "  he  would  know  a 
little  of  everything."  The  anecdote  is  told  in  another 
way  too,  which  perhaps  makes  it  even  more  piquant. 
"  The  new  Lord  Chancellor  knows  a  little  of  everything  in 
the  world — even  of  law." 

Brougham's  was  an  excitable  and  self-asserting  nature. 

3 


34  A  niSTOBY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

He  had  during  many  years  shown  himself  an  embodied 
influence,  a  living,  speaking  force  in  the  promotion  of 
great  political  and  social  reforms.  If  his  talents  were 
great,  if  his  personal  vanity  was  immense,  let  it  be  said 
that  his  services  to  the  cause  of  human  freedom  and 
education  were  simply  inestimable.  As  an  opponent  of 
slavery  in  the  colonies,  as  an  advocate  of  political  reform 
at  home,  of  law  reform,  of  popular  education,  of  religious 
equality,  he  had  worked  with  indomitable  zeal,  with  resist- 
less passion,  and  with  splendid  success.  But  his  career 
passed  through  two  remarkable  changes  which,  to  a  great 
extent,  interfered  with  the  full  efficacy  of  his  extraordinary 
powers.  The  first  was  when  from  popular  tribune  and 
reformer  he  became  Lord  Chancellor  in  1830;  the  second 
was  when  he  was  left  out  of  office  on  the  reconstruction  of 
the  Whig  Ministry  hi  April,  1835,  and  he  passed  for  the 
remainder  of  his  life  into  the  position  of  an  independent  or 
unattached  critic  of  the  measures  and  policy  of  other  men. 
It  has  never  been  clearly  known  why  the  Whigs  so  sud- 
denly threw  over  Brougham.  The  common  belief  is  that 
his  eccentricities  and  his  almost  savage  temper  made  him 
intolerable  in  a  cabinet.  It  has  been  darkly  hinted  that  for 
awhile  his  intellect  was  actually  under  a  cloud,  as  people 
said  that  of  Chatham  was  during  a  momentous  season. 

Lord  Brougham  was  not  a  man  likely  to  forget  or  for- 
give the  wrong  which  he  must  have  believed  that  he  had 
sustained  at  the  hands  of  the  Whigs.  He  became  the 
fiercest  and  most  formidable  of  Lord  Melbourne's  hostile 
critics. 

The  other  opponent  who  has  been  spoken  of  was  Lord 
Lyndhurst.  Lord  Lyndhurst  resembled  Lord  Brougham 
in  the  length  of  his  career  and  in  capacity  for  work,  if  in 
nothing  else.  Lyndhurst,  who  was  born  in  Boston  the 
year  before  the  tea-ships  were  boarded  in  that  harbor 
and  their  cargoes  flung  into  the  water,  has  been  heard 


STATESMEN  AND  PARTIES.  35 

addressing  the  House  of  Lords  in  all  vigor  and  fluency 
by  men  who  are  yet  far  from  middle  age.  He  was  one  of 
the  most  effective  Parliamentary  debaters  of  a  time  which 
has  known  such  men  as  Peel  and  Palmerston,  Gladstone 
and  Disraeli,  Bright  and  Cobden.  His  style  was  singu- 
larly and  even  severely  clear,  direct,  and  pure ;  his  man- 
ner  was  easy  and  graceful ;  his  voice  remarkably  sweet 
and  strong.  Nothing  could  have  been  in  greater  contrast 
than  his  clear,  correct,  nervous  argument,  and  the  impas- 
sioned invectives  and  overwhelming  strength  of  Broug- 
ham. Lyndhurst  had,  as  has  been  said,  an  immense  capa- 
city for  work,  when  the  work  had  to  be  done ;  but  his 
natural  tendency  was  as  distinctly  toward  indolence  as 
Brougham's  was  toward  unresting  activity.  Nor  were 
Lyndhurst's  political  convictions  ever  very  clear.  By  the 
habitude  of  associating  with  the  Tories,  and  receiving 
office  from  them,  and  speaking  for  them,  and  attacking 
their  enemies  with  argument  and  sarcasm,  Lyndhurst 
finally  settled  down  into  all  the  ways  of  Toryism.  But 
nothing  in  his  varied  history  showed  that  he  had  any 
particular  preference  that  way ;  and  there  were  many 
passages  in  his  career  when  it  would  seem  as  if  a  turn  of 
chance  decided  what  path  of  political  life  he  was  to  fol- 
low. As  a  keen  debater  he  was,  perhaps,  hardly  ever 
excelled  in  Parliament ;  but  he  had  neither  the  passion 
nor  the  genius  of  the  orator ;  and  his  capacity  was  narrow 
indeed  in  its  range  when  compared  with  the  astonishing 
versatility  and  omnivorous  mental  activity  of  Brougham. 
As  a  speaker  he  was  always  equal.  He  seemed  to  know 
no  varying  moods  or  fits  of  mental  lassitude.  Whenever 
he  spoke  he  reached  at  once  the  same  high  level  as  a 
debater.  The  very  fact  may  in  itself,  perhaps,  be  taken 
as  conclusive  evidence  that  he  was  not  an  orator.  The 
higher  qualities  of  the  orator  are  no  more  to  be  sum- 
moned at  will  than  those  of  the  poet. 


3(i  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

These  two  men  were  without  any  comparison  the  two 
leading  debaters  in  the  House  of  Lords.  Lord  Melbourne 
had  not  at  that  time  in  the  Upper  House  a  single  man  of 
first-class  or  even  of  second-class  debating  power  on  the 
bench  of  the  ministry.  An  able  writer  has  well  remarked 
that  the  position  of  the  ministry  in  the  House  of  Lords 
might  be  compared  to  that  of  a  water-logged  wreck  into 
which  enemies  from  all  quarters  are  pouring  their  broad- 
sides. 

The  accession  of  the  Queen  made  it  necessary  that  a 
new  Parliament  should  be  summoned.  The  struggle  be- 
tween parties  among  the  constituencies  was  very  ani- 
mated, and  was  carried  on  in  some  instances  with  a  re- 
course to  manoeuvre  and  stratagem  such  as  in  our  time 
would  hardly  be  possible.  The  result  was  not  a  very 
marked  alteration  in  the  condition  of  parties ;  but,  on  the 
whole,  the  advantage  remained  with  the  Tories.  Some- 
where about  this  time,  it  may  be  remarked,  the  use  of  the 
word  "  Conservative,"  to  describe  the  later  political  party, 
first  came  into  fashion.  Mr.  Wilson  Croker  is  credited 
with  the  honor  of  having  first  employed  the  word  in  that 
sense.  In  an  article  in  the  Quarterly  Review  some  years 
before,  he  spoke  of  being  decidedly  and  conscientiously 
attached  "  to  what  is  called  the  Tory,  but  which  might 
with  more  propriety  be  called  the  Conservative  party." 
During  the  elections  for  the  new  Parliament,  Lord  John 
Russell,  speaking  at  a  public  dinner  at  Stroud,  made 
allusion  to  the  new  name  which  his  opponents  were 
beginning  to  affect  for  their  party.  "  If  that,"  he  said, 
"  is  the  name  that  pleases  them,  if  they  say  that  the  old 
distinction  of  Whig  and  Tory  should  no  longer  be  kept 
up,  I  am  ready,  in  opposition  to  their  name  of  Conserva- 
tive, to  take  the  name  of  Reformer,  and  to  stand  by  that 
opposition." 

The  Tories,  or  Conservatives,  then,  had  a  slight  gain 


STATESMEN  AND  PAETIES.  87 

as  the  result  of  the  appeal  to  the  country.  The  new  Par- 
liament, on  its  assembling,  seems  to  have  gathered  in  the 
Commons  an  unusually  large  number  of  gifted  and  prom- 
ising men.  There  was  something,  too,  of  a  literary  stamp 
about  it,  a  fact  not  much  to  be  observed  in  Parliaments 
of  a  date  nearer  to  the  present  time.  Mr.  Grote,  the  his- 
torian of  Greece,  sat  for  the  city  of  London.  The  late 
Lord  Lytton,  then  Mr.  Edward  Lytton  Bulwer,  had  a 
seat — an  advanced  Radical  at  that  day.  Mr.  Disraeli 
came  then  into  Parliament  for  the  first  time.  Charles 
Buller,  full  of  high  spirits,  brilliant  humor,  and  the  very 
inspiration  of  keen  good-sense,  seemed  on  the  sure  way  to 
that  career  of  renown  which  a  premature  death  cut  short. 
Sir  William  Molesworth  was  an  excellent  type  of  the 
school  which  in  later  days  was  called  the  Philosophical 
Radical.  Another  distinguished  member  of  the  same 
school,  Mr.  Roebuck,  had  lost  his  seat,  and  was  for  the  mo- 
ment an  outsider.  Mr.  Gladstone  had  been  already  five 
years  in  Parliament.  The  late  Lord  Carlisle,  then  Lord 
Morpeth,  was  looked  upon  as  a  graceful  specimen  of  the 
literary  and  artistic  young  nobleman,  who  also  cultivates 
a  little  politics  for  his  intellectual  amusement.  Lord  John 
Russell  had  but  lately  begun  his  career  as  leader  of  the 
House  of  Commons  ;  Lord  Palmerston  was  Foreign  Secre- 
tary, but  had  not  even  then  got  the  credit  of  the  great 
ability  which  he  possessed.  Not  many  years  before  Mr. 
Greville  spoke  of  him  as  a  man  who  "  had  been  twenty 
years  in  office,  and  had  never  distinguished  himself 
before."  Mr.  Greville  expresses  a  mild  surprise  at  the  high 
opinion  which  persons  who  knew  Lord  Palmerston  inti- 
mately were  pleased  to  entertain  as  to  his  ability  and  his 
capacity  for  work.  Only  those  who  knew  him  very  inti- 
mately indeed  had  any  idea  of  the  capacity  for  governing 
Parliament  and  the  country  which  he  was  soon  afterward 
to  display.  Sir  Robert  Peel  was  leader  of  the  Conserva- 


88  A  U1STORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

tive  party.  Lord  Stanley,  the  late  Lord  Derby,  was  still 
in  the  House  of  Commons.  He  had  not  long  before  broken 
definitely  with  the  Whigs  on  the  question  of  the  Irish 
ecclesiastical  establishment,  and  had  passed  over  to  that 
Conservative  party  of  which  he  afterward  became  the 
most  influential  leader,  and  the  most  powerful  Parliament- 
ary orator.  O'Connell  and  Sheil  represented  the  eloquence 
of  the  Irish  national  party.  Decidedly  the  House  of  Com- 
mons first  elected  during  Queen  Victoria's  reign  was 
strong  in  eloquence  and  talent.  Only  two  really  great 
speakers  have  arisen,  in  the  forty  years  that  followed, 
who  were  not  members  of  Parliament  at  that  time — Mr. 
Cobden  and  Mr.  Bright.  Mr.  Cobden  had  come  forward 
as  a  candidate  for  the  borough  of  Stockport,  but  was  not 
successful,  and  did  not  obtain  a  seat  in  Parliament  until 
four  years  after.  It  was  only  by  what  may  be  called  an 
accident  that  Macaulay  and  Mr.  Roebuck  were  not  hi  the 
Parliament  of  1837.  It  is  fair  to  say,  therefore,  that, 
except  for  Cobden  and  Bright,  the  subsequent  forty  years 
had  added  no  first-class  name  to  the  records  of  Parlia- 
mentary eloquence. 

The  ministry  was  not  very  strong  in  the  House  of  Com- 
mons. Its  conditions,  indeed,  hardly  allowed  it  to  feel 
itself  strong  even  if  it  had  had  more  powerful  representa- 
tives in  either  House.  Its  adherents  were  but  loosely 
held  together.  The  more  ardent  reformers  were  disap- 
pointed with  ministers;  the  Free-trade  movement  was 
rising  into  distinct  bulk  and  proportions,  and  threatened 
to  be  formidably  independent  of  mere  party  ties.  The 
Government  had  to  rely  a  good  deal  on  the  precarious 
support  of  Mr.  O'Connell  and  his  followers.  They  were 
not  rich  in  debating  talent  in  the  Commons  any  more  than 
in  the  Lords.  Sir  Robert  Peel,  the  leader  of  the  Opposi- 
tion, was  by  far  the  most  powerful  man  in  the  House  of 
Commons.  Added  to  his  great  qualities  as  an  adniinis- 


STATESMEN  AND  PARTIES.  39 

trator  and  a  Parliamentary  debater,  he  had  the  virtue, 
then  very  rare  among  Conservative  statesmen,  of  being  a 
sound  and  clear  financier,  with  a  good  grasp  of  the  funda- 
mental principles  of  political  economy.  His  high  austere 
character  made  him  respected  by  opponents  as  well  as  by 
friends.  He  had  not,  perhaps,  many  intimate  friends. 
His  temperament  was  cold,  or  at  least  its  heat  was  self-con- 
tained ;  he  threw  out  no  genial  glow  to  those  around  him. 
He  was  by  nature  a  reserved  and  shy  man,  in  whose  man- 
ners shyness  took  the  form  of  pompousness  and  coldness. 
Something  might  be  said  of  him  like  that  which  Richter 
said  of  Schiller :  he  was  to  strangers  stony,  and  like  a  pre- 
cipice from  which  it  was  their  instinct  to  spring  back.  It 
is  certain  that  he  had  warm  and  generous  feelings,  but 
his  very  sensitiveness  only  led  him  to  disguise  them. 
The  contrast  between  his  emotions  and  his  lack  of  demon- 
strativeness  created  in  him  a  constant  artificiality  which 
often  seemed  mere  awkwardness.  It  was  in  the  House  of 
Commons  that  his  real  genius  and  character  displayed 
themselves.  The  atmosphere  of  debate  was  to  him  what 
Macaulay  says  wine  was  to  Addison,  the  influence  which 
broke  the  spell  under  which  his  fine  intellect  seemed  other- 
wise to  lie  imprisoned.  Peel  was  a  perfect  master  of  the 
House  of  Commons.  He  was  as  great  an  orator  as  any 
man  could  be  who  addresses  himself  to  the  House  of  Com- 
mons, its  ways  and  its  purposes  alone.  He  went  as  near, 
perhaps,  to  the  rank  of  a  great  orator  as  any  one  can  go 
who  is  but  little  gifted  with  imagination.  Oratory  has 
been  well  described  as  the  fusion  of  reason  and  passion. 
Passion  always  carries  something  of  the  imaginative  along 
with  it.  Sir  Robert  Peel  had  little  imagination,  and 
almost  none  of  that  passion  which  in  eloquence  sometimes 
supplies  its  place.  His  style  was  clear,  strong,  and  stately ; 
full  of  various  argument  and  apt  illustration  drawn  from 
books  and  from  the  world  of  politics  and  commerce.  He 


40  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

followed  a  difficult  argument  home  to  its  utter  conclusions ; 
and  if  it  had  in  it  any  lurking  fallacy  he  brought  out  the 
weakness  into  the  clearest  light,  often  with  a  happy  touch 
of  humor  and  quiet  sarcasm.  His  speeches  might  be  de- 
scribed as  the  very  perfection  of  good-sense  and  high  prin- 
ciple clothed  in  the  most  impressive  language.  But  they 
were  something  more  peculiar  than  this,  for  they  were  so 
constructed,  in  their  argument  and  their  style  alike,  as  to 
touch  the  very  core  of  the  intelligence  of  the  House  of 
Commons.  They  told  of  the  feelings  and  the  inspiration 
of  Parliament  as  the  ballad-music  of  a  country  tells  of  its 
scenery  and  its  national  sentiments. 

Lord  Stanley  was  a  far  more  energetic  and  impassioned 
speaker  than  Sir  Robert  Peel,  and  perhaps  occasionally,  in 
has  later  career,  came  now  and  then  nearer  to  the  height 
of  genuine  oratory.  But  Lord  Stanley  was  little  more 
than  a  splendid  Parliamentary  partisan,  even  when,  long 
after,  he  was  Prime-minister  of  England.  He  had  very 
little,  indeed,  of  that  class  of  information  which  the 
modern  world  requires  of  its  statesmen  and  leaders.  Of 
political  economy,  of  finance,  of  the  development  and  the 
discoveries  of  modern  science,  he  knew  almost  as  little  as 
it  is  possible  for  an  able  and  energetic  man  to  know  who 
lives  in  the  throng  of  active  life  and  hears  what  people 
are  talking  of  around  him.  He  once  said  good-humoredly 
of  himself,  that  he  was  brought  up  in  the  pre-scientific 
period.  His  scholarship  was  merely  such  training  in  the 
classic  languages  as  allowed  him  to  have  a  full  literary 
appreciation  of  the  beauty  of  Greek  and  Roman  literature. 
He  had  no  real  and  deep  knowledge  of  the  history  of  the 
Greek  and  the  Roman  people,  nor  probably  did  he  at  all 
appreciate  the  great  difference  between  the  spirit  of 
Roman  and  of  Greek  civilization.  He  had,  in  fact,  what 
would  have  been  called  at  an  earlier  day  an  elegant  schol- 
arship ;  he  had  a  considerable  knowledge  of  the  politics  of 


STATESMEN  AND  PARTIES.  41 

his  time  in  most  European  countries,  an  energetic,  intrepid 
spirit,  and  with  him,  as  Macaulay  well  said,  the  science  of 
Parliamentary  debate  seemed  to  be  an  instinct.  There 
was  no  speaker  on  the  ministerial  benches  at  that  time 
who  could  for  a  moment  be  compared  with  him. 

Lord  John  Russell,  who  had  the  leadership  of  the  party 
in  the  House  of  Commons,  was  really  a  much  stronger 
man  than  he  seemed  to  be.  He  had  a  character  for  daunt- 
less courage  and  confidence  among  his  friends ;  for  bound- 
less self-conceit  among  his  enemies.  Every  one  remem- 
bers Sydney  Smith's  famous  illustrations  of  Lord  John 
Russell's  unlimited  faith  in  his  own  power  of  achievement. 
Thomas  Moore  addressed  a  poem  to  him  at  one  time,  when 
Lord  John  Russell  thought  or  talked  of  giving  up  politi- 
cal life,  in  which  he  appeals  to  "  thy  genius,  thy  youth, 
and  thy  name,"  declares  that  the  instinct  of  the  young 
statesman  is  the  same  as  "  the  eaglet's  to  soar  with  his 
eyes  on  the  sun,"  and  implores  him  not  to  "  think  for  an 
instant  thy  country  can  spare  such  a  light  from  her  darken- 
ing horizon  as  thou."  Later  observers,  to  whom  Lord 
John  Russell  appeared  probably  remarkable  for  a  cold  and 
formal  style  as  a  debater,  and  for  lack  of  originating 
power  as  a  statesman,  may  find  it  difficult  to  reconcile  the 
poet's  picture  with  their  own  impressions  of  the  reality. 
But  it  is  certain  that  at  one  time  the  reputation  of  Lord 
John  Russell  was  that  of  a  rather  reckless  man  of  genius, 
a  sort  of  Whig  Shelley.  He  had,  in  truth,  much  less 
genius  than  his  friends  and  admirers  believed,  and  a  great 
deal  more  of  practical  strength  than  either  friends  or  foes 
gave  him  credit  for.  He  became,  not  indeed  an  orator, 
but  a  very  keen  debater,  who  was  especially  effective  in  a 
cold,  irritating  sarcasm  which  penetrated  the  weakness  of 
an  opponent's  argument  like  some  dissolving  acid.  In  the 
poem  from  which  we  have  quoted,  Moore  speaks  of  the 
eloquence  of  his  noble  friend  as  "  not  like  those  rills  from 


42  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

a  height,  which  sparkle  and  foam  and  in  vapor  are  o'er ; 
but  a  current  that  works  out  its  way  into  light  through 
the  filtering  recesses  of  thought  and  of  lore."  Allowing 
for  the  exaggeration  of  friendship  and  poetry,  this  is  not 
a  bad  description  of  what  Lord  John  Russell's  style 
became  at  its  best.  The  thin  bright  stream  of  argument 
worked  its  way  slowly  out,  and  contrived  to  wear  a  path 
for  itself  through  obstacles  which  at  first  the  looker-on 
might  have  felt  assured  it  never  could  penetrate.  Lord 
John  Russell's  swordsmanship  was  the  swordsmanship  of 
Saladin,  and  not  that  of  stout  King  Richard.  But  it  was 
very  effective  sword-play  in  its  own  way.  Our  English 
system  of  government  by  party  makes  the  history  of 
Parliament  seem  like  that  of  a  succession  of  great  political 
duels.  Two  men  stand  constantly  confronted  during  a 
series  of  years,  one  of  whom  is  at  the  head  of  the  Govern- 
ment, while  the  other  is  at  the  head  of  the  Opposition. 
They  change  places  with  each  victory.  The  conqueror 
goes  into  office ;  the  conquered  into  opposition.  This  is 
not  the  place  to  discuss  either  the  merits  or  the  probable 
duration  of  the  principle  of  government  by  party ;  it  is 
enough  to  say  here  that  it  undoubtedly  gives  a  very  ani- 
mated and  varied  complexion  to  our  political  struggles, 
and  invests  them,  indeed,  with  much  of  the  glow  and  pas- 
sion of  actual  warfare.  It  has  often  happened  that  the 
two  leading  opponents  are  men  of  intellectual  and  oratori- 
cal powers  so  fairly  balanced  that  their  followers  may 
well  dispute  among  themselves  as  to  the  superiority  of 
their  respective  chiefs,  and  that  the  public  in  general  may 
become  divided  into  two  schools,  not  merely  political,  but 
even  critical,  according  to  their  partiality  for  one  or  the 
other.  We  still  dispute  as  to  whether  Fox  or  Pitt  was 
the  greater  leader,  the  greater  orator ;  it  is  probable  that 
for  a  long  time  to  come  the  same  question  will  be  asked 
by  political  students  about  Gladstone  and  Disraeli.  For 


STATESMEN  AND  PARTIES.  43 

many  years  Lord  John  Russell  and  Sir  Robert  Peel  stood 
thus  opposed.  They  will  often  come  into  contrast  and 
comparison  in  these  pages.  For  the  present  it  is  enough 
to  say  that  Peel  had  by  far  the  more  original  mind,  and 
that  Lord  John  Russell  never  obtained  so  great  an  in- 
fluence over  the  House  of  Commons  as  that  which  his 
rival  long  enjoyed.  The  heat  of  political  passion  after- 
ward induced  a  bitter  critic  to  accuse  Peel  of  lack  of  origi- 
nality because  he  assimilated  readily  and  turned  to  account 
the  ideas  of  other  men.  Not  merely  the  criticism,  but  the 
principle  on  which  it  was  founded,  was  altogether  wrong. 
It  ought  to  be  left  to  children  to  suppose  that  nothing  is 
original  but  that  which  we  make  up,  as  the  childish  phrase 
is,  "  out  of  our  own  heads."  Originality  in  politics,  as  in 
every  field  of  art,  consists  in  the  use  and  application  of  the 
ideas  which  we  get  or  are  given  to  us.  The  greatest  proof 
Sir  Robert  Peel  ever  gave  of  high  and  genuine  states- 
manship was  in  his  recognition  that  the  time  had  come  to 
put  into  practical  legislation  the  principles  which  Cobden 
and  Villiers  and  Bright  had  been  advocating  in  the  House 
of  Commons.  Lord  John  Russell  was  a  born  reformer. 
He  had  sat  at  the  feet  of  Fox.  He  was  cradled  in  the 
principles  of  Liberalism.  He  held  faithfully  to  his  creed ; 
he  was  one  of  its  boldest  and  keenest  champions.  He  had 
great  advantages  over  Peel,  in  the  mere  fact  that  he  had 
begun  his  education  in  a  more  enlightened  school.  But 
he  wanted  passion  quite  as  much  as  Peel  did,  and  remained 
still  farther  than  Peel  below  the  level  of  the  genuine  orator. 
Russell,  as  we  have  said,  had  not  long  held  the  post  of 
leader  of  the  House  of  Commons  when  the  first  Parlia- 
ment of  Queen  Victoria  assembled.  He  was  still,  in  a 
manner,  on  trial ;  and  even  among  his  friends,  perhaps 
especially  among  his  friends,  there  were  whispers  that  his 
confidence  in  himself  was  greater  than  his  capacity  for 
leadership. 


44  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

After  the  chiefs  of  Ministry  and  of  Opposition,  the 
most  conspicuous  figure  in  the  House  of  Commons  was 
the  colossal  form  of  O'Connell,  the  great  Irish  agitator,  of 
whom  we  shall  hear  a  good  deal  more.  Among  the  fore- 
most orators  of  the  House  at  that  time  was  O'Connell's 
impassioned  lieutenant,  Richard  Lalor  Sheil.  It  is  curi- 
ous how  little  is  now  remembered  of  Sheil,  whom  so 
many  well-qualified  authorities  declared  to  be  a  genuine 
orator.  Lord  Beaconsfield,  in  one  of  his  novels,  speaks  of 
Shell's  eloquence  in  terms  of  the  highest  praise,  and  dispar- 
ages Canning.  It  is  but  a  short  time  since  Mr.  Gladstone 
selected  Sheil  as  one  of  three  remarkable  illustrations  of 
great  success  as  a  speaker,  achieved  in  spite  of  serious 
defects  of  voice  and  delivery;  the  other  two  examples 
being  Dr.  Chalmers  and  Dr.  Newman.  Mr.  Gladstone 
described  Sheil's  voice  as  like  nothing  but  the  sound  pro- 
duced by  "  a  tin  kettle  battered  about  from  place  to  place,'* 
knocking  first  against  one  side  and  then  against  another. 
"In  anybody  else,"  Mr.  Gladstone  went  on  to  say,  "I 
would  not,  if  it  had  been  in  my  choice,  like  to  have  listened 
to  that  voice ;  but  in  him  I  would  not  have  changed  it, 
for  it  was  part  of  a  most  remarkable  whole,  and  nobody 
ever  felt  it  painful  while  -listening  to  it.  He  was  a  great 
orator,  and  an  orator  of  much  preparation,  I  believe,  car- 
ried even  to  words,  with  a  very  vivid  imagination  and 
an  enormous  power  of  language,  and  of  strong  feeling. 
There  was  a  peculiar  character,  a  sort  of  half-wildness  in 
his  aspect  and  delivery ;  his  whole  figure,  and  his  delivery, 
and  his  voice  and  his  matter,  were  all  in  such  perfect  keep- 
ing with  one  another  that  they  formed  a  great  Parlia- 
mentary picture;  and  although  it  is  now  thirty-five  years 
since  I  heard  Mr.  Sheil,  my  recollection  of  him  is  just  as 
vivid  as  if  I  had  been  listening  to  him  to-day."  This  surely 
is  a  picture  of  a  great  orator,  as  Mr.  Gladstone  says 
Sheil  was.  Nor  is  it  easy  to  understand  how  a  man,  with- 


STATESMEN  AND  PAETIES.  45 

out  being  a  very  great  orator,  could  have  persuaded  two 
experts  of  such  different  schools  as  Mr.  Gladstone  and  Mr. 
Disraeli  that  he  deserves  such  a  name.  Yet  the  after- 
years  have  in  a  curious  but  unmistakable  way  denied  the 
claims  of  Sheil.  Perhaps  it  is  because,  if  he  really  was  an 
orator,  he  was  that  and  nothing  more,  that  our  practical 
age,  finding  no  mark  left  by  him  on  Parliament  or  politics, 
has  declined  to  take  much  account  even  of  his  eloquence. 
His  career  faded  away  into  second-class  ministerial  office, 
and  closed  at  last,  somewhat  prematurely,  in  the  little 
court  of  Florence,  where  he  was  sent  as  the  represent- 
ative of  England.  He  is  worth  mentioning  here,  because 
he  had  the  promise  of  a  splendid  reputation  ;  because  the 
charm  of  his  eloquence  evidently  lingered  long  in  the 
memories  of  those  to  whom  it  was  once  familiar,  and  be- 
cause his  is  one  of  the  most  brilliant  illustrations  of  that 
career  of  Irish  agitator,  which  begins  in  stormy  opposition 
to  English  government,  and  subsides  after  awhile  into 
meek  recognition  of  its  title  and  adoption  of  its  ministerial 
uniform.  O'Connell  we  have  passed  over  for  the  present, 
because  we  shall  hear  of  him  again ;  but  of  Sheil  it  is  not 
necessary  that  we  should  hear  any  more. 

This  was  evidently  a  remarkable  Parliament,  with  Rus- 
sell for  the  leader  of  one  party,  and  Peel  for  the  leader  of 
another ;  with  O'Connell  and  Sheil  as  independent  sup- 
porters of  the  ministry ;  with  Mr.  Gladstone  still  compar- 
ativety  new  to  public  life,  and  Mr.  Disraeli  to  address  the 
Commons  for  the  first  time ;  with  Palmerston  still  unrec- 
ognized, and  Stanley  lately  gone  over  to  Conservatism, 
itself  the  newest  invented  thing  in  politics ;  with  Grote 
and  Bulwer,  and  Joseph  Hume,  and  Charles  Buller ;  and 
Ward  and  Villiers,  Sir  Francis  Burdett,  and  Smith 
O'Brien,  and  the  Radical  Alcibiades  of  Finsbury,  "  Tom  " 
Duncombe. 


46  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 


CHAPTER  III. 

CANADA  AND  LORD  DURHAM. 

THE  first  disturbance  to  the  quiet  and  good  promise  of 
the  new  reign  came  from  Canada.  The  Parliament  which 
we  have  described  met  for  the  first  time  on  November 
20th,  1837,  and  was  to  have  been  adjourned  to  February 
1st,  1838 ;  but  the  news  which  began  to  arrive  from 
Canada  was  so  alarming,  that  the  ministry  were  com- 
pelled to  change  their  purpose  and  fix  the  reassembling 
of  the  Houses  for  January  16th.  The  disturbances  in 
Canada  had  already  broken  out  into  open  rebellion. 

The  condition  of  Canada  was  very  peculiar.  Lower  or 
Eastern  Canada  was  inhabited  for  the  most  part  by  men 
of  French  descent,  who  still  kept  up  in  the  midst  of  an 
active  and  moving  civilization  most  of  the  principles  and 
usages  which  belonged  to  France  before  the  Revolution. 
Even  to  this  day,  after  all  the  changes,  political  and  social, 
that  have  taken  place,  the  traveller  from  Europe  sees  hi 
many  of  the  towns  of  Lower  Canada  an  old-fashioned 
France,  such  as  he  had  known  otherwise  only  in  books 
that  tell  of  France  before  '89.  Nor  is  this  only  in  small 
sequestered  towns  and  villages  which  the  impulses  of  mod- 
ern ways  have  yet  failed  to  reach.  In  busy  and  trading 
Montreal,  with  its  residents  made  up  of  Englishmen, 
Scotchmen,  and  Americans,  as  well  as  the  men  of  French 
descent,  the  visitor  is  more  immediately  conscious  of  the 
presence  of  what  may  be  called  an  old-fashioned  Cathol- 


CANADA  AND  LORD  DURHAM.  47 

icism  than  he  is  in  Paris,  or  even  indeed  in  Rome.  In 
Quebec,  a  city  which  for  picturesqueness  and  beauty 
of  situation  is  not  equalled  by  Edinburgh  or  Florence, 
the  curious  interest  of  the  place  is  further  increased, 
the  novelty  of  the  sensations  it  produces  in  the  visitor  is 
made  more  piquant,  by  the  evidences  he  meets  with 
everywhere,  through  its  quaint  and  steepy  streets  and 
under  its  antiquated  archways,  of  the  existence  of  a 
society  which  has  hardly  in  France  survived  the  Great 
Revolution.  At  the  opening  of  Queen  Victoria's  reign, 
the  undiluted  character  of  this  French  medisevalism  was, 
of  course,  much  more  remarkable.  It  would  doubtless 
have  exhibited  itself  quietly  enough  if  it  were  absolutely 
undiluted.  Lower  Canada  would  have  dozed  away  in 
its  sleepy  picturesqueness,  held  fast  to  its  ancient  ways, 
and  allowed  a  bustling,  giddy  world,  all  alive  with  com- 
merce and  ambition,  and  desire  for  novelty  and  the 
terribly  disturbing  thing  which  unresting  people  called 
progress,  to  rush  on  its  wild  path  unheeded.  But  its 
neighbors  and  its  newer  citizens  were  not  disposed  to 
allow  Lower  Canada  thus  to  rot  itself  in  ease  on  the 
decaying  wharves  of  the  St.  Lawrence  and  the  St. 
Charles.  In  the  large  towns  there  were  active  traders 
from  England  and  other  countries,  who  were  by  no  means 
content  to  put  up  with  Old-World  ways,  and  to  let  the 
magnificent  resources  of  the  place  run  to  waste.  Upper 
Canada,  on  the  other  hand,  was  all  new  as  to  its  popula- 
tion, and  was  full  of  the  modern  desire  for  commercial 
activity.  Upper  Canada  was  peopled  almost  exclusively 
by  inhabitants  from  Great  Britain.  Scotch  settlers,  with 
all  the  energy  and  push  of  their  country  ;  men  from  the 
northern  province  of  Ireland,  who  might  be  described  as 
virtually  Scotch  also,  came  there.  The  emigrant  from 
the  south  of  Ireland  went  to  the  United  States  because 
he  found  there  a  country  more  or  less  hostile  to  England, 


48  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

and  because  there  the  Catholic  Church  was  understood  to 
be  flourishing.  The  Ulsterman  went  to  Canada  as  the 
Scotchman  did,  because  he  saw  the  flag  of  England  flying, 
and  the  principle  of  religious  establishment  which  he 
admired  at  home  still  recognized.  It  is  almost  needless  to 
say  that  Englishmen  in  great  numbers  were  settled  there, 
whose  chief  desire  was  to  make  the  colony  as  far  as  pos- 
sible a  copy  of  the  institutions  of  England.  When  Canada 
was  ceded  to  England  by  France,  as  a  consequence  of  the 
victories  of  Wolfe,  the  population  was  nearly  all  in  the 
lower  province,  and  therefore  was  nearly  all  of  French 
origin.  Since  the  cession  the  growth  of  the  population 
of  the  other  province  had  been  surprisingly  rapid,  and 
had  been  almost  exclusively  the  growth,  as  we  have  seen, 
of  immigration  from  Great  Britain,  one  or  two  of  the 
colonizing  states  of  the  European  continent,  and  the 
American  Republic  itself. 

It  is  easy  to  see  on  the  very  face  of  things  some  of  the 
difficulties  which  must  arise  in  the  development  of  such 
a  system.  The  French  of  Lower  Canada  would  regard 
with  almost  morbid  jealousy  any  legislation  which  ap- 
peared likely  to  interfere  with  their  ancient  ways  and  to 
give  any  advantage  or  favor  to  the  populations  of  British 
descent.  The  latter  would  see  injustice  or  feebleness  in 
every  measure  which  did  not  assist  them  in  developing 
their  more  energetic  ideas.  The  home  Government,  in 
such  a  condition  of  things,  often  has  especial  trouble  with 
those  whom  we  may  call  its  own  people.  Their  very 
loyalty  to  the  institutions  of  the  Old  Country  impels 
them  to  be  unreasonable  and  exacting.  It  is  not  easy  to 
make  them  understand  why  they  should  not  be  at  the 
least  encouraged,  if  not  indeed  actually  enabled,  to  carry 
boldly  out  the  Anglicizing  policy  which  they  clearly  see 
is  to  be  for  the  good  of  the  colony  in  the  end.  The  Gov- 
ernment has  all  the  difficulty  that  the  mother  of  a  house- 


CANADA  AND  LORD  DURHAM.  49 

hold  has  when,  with  the  best  intentions  and  the  most 
conscientious  resolve  to  act  impartially,  she  is  called 
upon  to  manage  her  own  children  and  the  children  of  her 
husband's  former  marriage.  Every  word  she  says,  every 
resolve  she  is  induced  to  acknowledge,  is  liable  to  be 
regarded  with  jealousy  and  dissatisfaction  on  the  one 
side  as  well  as  on  the  other.  "  You  are  doing  everything 
to  favor  your  own  children,"  the  one  set  cry  out.  "  You 
ought  to  do  something  more  for  your  own  children,"  is 
the  equally  querulous  remonstrance  of  the  other. 

It  would  have  been  difficult,  therefore,  for  the  home 
Government,  however  wise  and  far-seeing  their  policy,  to 
make  the  wheels  of  any  system  run  smoothly  at  once  in 
such  a  colony  as  Canada.  But  their  policy  certainly  does 
not  seem  to  have  been  either  wise  or  far-seeing.  The 
plan  of  government  adopted  looks  as  if  it  were  especially 
devised  to  bring  out  into  sharp  relief  all  the  antagonisms 
that  were  natural  to  the  existing  state  of  things.  By  an 
Act  called  the  Constitution  of  1791,  Canada  was  divided 
into  two  provinces,  the  Upper  and  the  Lower.  Each 
province  had  a  separate  system  of  government — consist- 
ing of  a  governor ;  an  executive  council  appointed  by  the 
Crown,  and  supposed  in  some  way  to  resemble  the  Privy 
Council  of  this  country ;  a  legislative  council,  the  mem- 
bers of  which,  were  appointed  by  the  Crown  for  life ;  and 
a  representative  assembly,  the  members  of  which  were 
elected  for  four  years.  At  the  same  time  the  clergy 
reserves  were  established  by  Parliament.  One-seventh 
of  the  waste  lands  of  the  colony  was  set  aside  for  the 
maintenance  of  the  Protestant  clergy — a  fruitful  source  of 
disturbance  and  ill-feeling. 

When  the  two  provinces  were  divided  in  1791,  the  inten- 
tion was  that  they  should  remain  distinct  in  fact  as  well  as 
in  name.  It  was  hoped  that  Lower  Canada  would  remain 
altogether  French,  and  that  Upper  Canada  would  be  exclu- 

4 


60  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

sively  English.  Then  it  was  thought  that  they  might  be 
governed  on  their  separate  systems  as  securely  and  with 
as  little  trouble  as  we  now  govern  the  Mauritius  on  one 
system  and  Malta  on  another. 

Those  who  formed  such  an  idea  do  not  seem  to  have 
taken  any  counsel  with  geography.  The  one  fact,  that 
Upper  Canada  can  hardly  be  said  to  have  any  means  of 
communication  with  Europe  and  the  whole  Eastern  world 
except  through  Lower  Canada,  or  else  through  the  United 
States,  ought  to  have  settled  the  question  at  once.  It  was 
in  Lower  Canada  that  the  greatest  difficulties  arose.  A 
constant  antagonism  grew  up  between  the  majority  of 
the  legislative  council,  who  were  nominees  of  the  Crown, 
and  the  majority  of  the  representative  assembly,  who 
were  elected  by  the  population  of  the  province.  The 
home  Government  encouraged,  and  indeed  kept  up,  that 
most  odious  and  dangerous  of  all  instruments  for  the 
supposed  management  of  a  colony — a  "  British  party  " 
devoted  to  the  so-called  interests  of  the  mother  country 
and  obedient  to  the  word  of  command  from  their  mas- 
ters and  patrons  at  home.  The  majority  in  the  legisla- 
tive council  constantly  thwarted  the  resolutions  of  the 
vast  majority  of  the  popular  assembly.  Disputes  arose  as 
to  the  voting  of  supplies.  The  Government  retained  in 
their  service  officials  whom  the  representative  assembly  had 
condemned,  and  insisted  on  the  right  to  pay  them  their 
salaries  out  of  certain  funds  of  the  colony.  The  repre- 
sentative assembly  took  to  stopping  the  supplies,  and  the 
Government  claimed  the  right  to  counteract  this  measure 
by  appropriating  to  the  purpose  such  public  moneys  as 
happened  to  be  within  their  reach  at  the  time.  The  colony 
— for  indeed  on  these  subjects  the  population  of  Lower 
Canada,  right  or  wrong,  was  so  near  to  being  of  one  mind 
that  we  may  take  the  declarations  of  public  meetings  as 
representing  the  colony — demanded  that  the  legislative 


CANADA  AND  LORD  DURHAM.  51 

council  should  be  made  elective,  and  that  the  colonial 
government  should  not  be  allowed  to  dispose  of  the  moneys 
of  the  colony  at  their  pleasure.  The  House  of  Commons 
and  the  Government  here  replied  by  refusing  to  listen  to 
the  proposal  to  make  the  legislative  council  an  elective 
body,  and  authorizing  the  provincial  government,  without 
the  consent  of  the  colonial  representation  to  appropriate 
the  money  in  the  treasury  for  the  administration  of  justice 
and  the  maintenance  of  the  executive  system.  This  was, 
in  plain  words,  to  announce  to  the  French  population,  who 
made  up  the  vast  majority,  and  whom  we  had  taught  to 
believe  in  the  representative  form  of  government,  that 
their  wishes  would  never  count  for  anything,  and  that  the 
colony  was  to  be  ruled  solely  at  the  pleasure  of  the  little 
British  party  of  officials  and  Crown  nominees.  It  is  not 
necessary  to  suppose  that  in  all  these  disputes  the  popular 
majority  were  in  the  right  and  the  officials  in  the  wrong. 
No  one  can  doubt  that  there  was  much  bitterness  of  feel- 
ing arising  out  of  the  mere  differences  of  race.  The 
French  and  the  English  could  not  be  got  to  blend.  In 
some  places,  as  it  was  afterwards  said  in  the  famous  re- 
port of  Lord  Durham,  the  two  sets  of  colonists  never 
publicly  met  together  except  in  the  jury-box,  and  then 
only  for  the  obstruction  of  justice.  The  British  residents 
complained  bitterly  of  being  subject  to  French  law  and 
procedure  in  so  many  of  their  affairs.  The  tenure  of  land 
and  many  other  conditions  of  the  system  were  antique 
French,  and  the  French  law  worked,  or  rather  did  not 
work,  in  civil  affairs  side  by  side  with  the  equally  impeded 
British  law  in  criminal  matters.  At  last  the  representa- 
tive assembly  refused  to  vote  any  further  supplies  or  to 
carry  on  any  further  business.  They  formulated  their 
grievances  against  the  home  Government.  Their  com- 
plaints were  of  arbitrary  conduct  on  the  part  of  the  gov- 
ernors ;  intolerable  composition  of  the  legislative  council, 


52  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  Oll'N  TIMES. 

which  they  insisted  ought  to  be  elective ;  illegal  appro- 
priation of  the  public  money ;  and  violent  prorogation  of 
the  provincial  Parliament. 

One  of  the  leading  men  in  the  movement  which  after- 
ward became  rebellion  in  Lower  Canada  was  Mr.  Louis 
Joseph  Papineau.  This  man  had  risen  to  high  position 
by  his  talents,  his  energy,  and  his  undoubtedly  honorable 
character.  He  had  represented  Montreal  in  the  Repre- 
sentative Assembly  of  Lower  Canada,  and  he  afterward 
became  Speaker  of  the  House.  He  made  himself  leader 
of  the  movement  to  protest  against  the  policy  of  the  gover- 
nors, and  that  of  the  Government  at  home,  by  whom  they 
were  sustained.  He  held  a  series  of  meetings,  at  some  of 
which  undoubtedly  rather  strong  language  was  used,  and 
too  frequent  and  significant  appeals  were  made  to  the 
example  held  out  to  the  population  of  Lower  Canada  by 
the  successful  revolt  of  the  United  States.  Mr.  Papineau 
also  planned  the  calling  together  of  a  great  convention  to 
discuss  and  proclaim  the  grievances  of  the  colonies.  Lord 
Gosford,  the  governor,  began  by  dismissing  several  militia 
officers  who  had  taken  part  hi  some  of  these  demonstra- 
tions ;  Mr.  Papineau  himself  was  an  officer  of  this  force. 
Then  the  governor  issued  warrants  for  the  apprehension 
of  many  members  of  the  popular  Assembly  on  the  charge 
of  high-treason.  Some  of  these  at  once  left  the  country ; 
others  against  whom  warrants  were  issued  were  arrested, 
and  a  sudden  resistance  was  made  by  their  friends  and 
supporters.  Then,  in  the  manner  familiar  to  all  who 
have  read  anything  of  the  history  of  revolutionary  move- 
ments, the  resistance  to  a  capture  of  prisoners  suddenly 
transformed  itself  into  open  rebellion. 

The  rebellion  was  not,  in  a  military  sense,  a  very  great 
thing.  At  its  first  outbreak  the  military  authorities  were 
for  a  moment  surprised,  and  the  rebels  obtained  one  or 
two  trifling  advantages.  But  the  commander-in-chief  at 


CANADA  AND  LOED  DURHAM.  53 

once  showed  energy  adequate  to  the  occasion,  and  used, 
as  it  was  his  duty  to  do,  a  strong  hand  in  putting  the 
movement  down.  The  rebels  fought  with  something  like 
desperation  in  one  or  two  instances,  and  there  was,  it  must 
be  said,  a  good  deal  of  blood  shed.  The  disturbance,  how- 
ever, after  awhile  extended  to  the  upper  province.  Upper 
Canada  too  had  its  complaints  against  its  governors  and 
the  home  Government,  and  its  protests  against  having  its 
offices  all  disposed  of  by  a  "  family  compact ; "  but  the 
rebellious  movement  does  not  seem  to  have  taken  a 
genuine  hold  of  the  province  at  any  time.  There  was 
some  discontent ;  there  was  a  constant  stimulus  to  excite- 
ment kept  up  from  across  the  American  frontier  by  sym- 
pathizers with  any  republican  movement ;  and  there  were 
some  excitable  persons  inclined  for  revolutionary  change 
in  the  province  itself  whose  zeal  caught  fire  when  the 
flame  broke  out  in  Lower  Canada.  But  it  seems  to  have 
been  an  exotic  movement  altogether,  and,  so  far  as  its 
military  history  is  concerned,  deserves  notice  chiefly  for 
the  chivalrous  eccentricity  of  the  plan  by  which  the 
governor  of  the  province  undertook  to  put  it  down.  The 
governor  was  the  gallant  and  fanciful  soldier  and  traveller, 
Sir  Francis,  then  Major,  Head.  He  who  had  fought  at 
Waterloo,  and  seen  much  service  besides,  was  quietly  per- 
forming the  duties  of  Assistant  Poor  Law  Commissioner 
for  the  county  of  Kent,  when  he  was  summoned,  in  1835, 
at  a  moment's  notice,  to  assume  the  governorship  of 
Upper  Canada.  When  the  rebellion  broke  out  in  that 
province,  Major  Head  proved  himself  not  merely  equal  to 
the  occasion,  but  boldly  superior  to  it.  He  promptly 
resolved  to  win  a  grand  moral  victory  over  all  rebellion 
then  and  for  the  future.  He  was  seized  with  a  desire  to 
show  to  the  whole  world  how  vain  it  was  for  any  dis- 
turber to  think  of  shaking  the  loyalty  of  the  province 
under  his  control.  He  issued  to  rebellion  in  general  a 


54  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

challenge  not  unlike  that  which  Shakspeare's  Prince 
Harry  offers  to  the  chiefs  of  the  insurrection  against 
Henry  IV.  He  invited  it  to  come  on  and  settle  the 
controversy  by  a  sort  of  duel.  He  sent  all  the  regular 
soldiers  out  of  the  province  to  the  help  of  the  authorities 
of  Lower  Canada ;  he  allowed  the  rebels  to  mature  their 
plans  in  any  way  they  liked ;  he  permitted  them  to  choose 
their  own  day  and  hour,  and  when  they  were  ready  to 
begin  their  assaults  on  constituted  authority,  he  summoned 
to  his  side  the  militia  and  all  the  loyal  inhabitants,  and 
with  their  help  he  completely  extinguished  the  rebellion. 
It  was  but  a  very  trifling  affair ;  it  went  out  or  collapsed 
in  a  moment.  Major  Head  had  his  desire.  He  showed 
that  rebellion  in  that  province  was  not  a  thing  serious 
enough  to  call  for  the  intervention  of  regular  troops.  The 
loyal  colonists  were  for  the  most  part  delighted  with  the 
spirited  conduct  of  their  leader  and  his  new-fashioned  way 
of  dealing  with  rebellion.  No  doubt  the  moral  effect 
was  highly  imposing.  The  plan  was  almost  as  original 
as  that  described  in  Herodotus  and  introduced  into  one 
of  Massinger's  plays,  when  the  moral  authority  of  the 
masters  is  made  to  assert  itself  over  the  rebellious  slaves 
by  the  mere  exhibition  of  the  symbolic  whip.  But  the 
authorities  at  home  took  a  somewhat  more  prosaic  view 
of  the  policy  of  Sir  Francis  Head.  It  was  suggested  that 
if  the  fears  of  many  had  been  realized,  and  the  rebellion 
had  been  aided  by  a  large  force  of  sympathizers  from  the 
United  States,  the  moral  authority  of  Canadian  loyalty 
might  have  stood  greatly  in  need  of  the  material  presence 
of  regular  troops.  In  the  end  Sir  Francis  Head  resigned 
his  office.  His  loyalty,  courage,  and  success  were  acknowl- 
edged by  the  gift  of  a  baronetcy ;  and  he  obtained  the 
admiration  not  merely  of  those  who  approved  his  policy, 
but  even  of  many  among  those  who  felt  bound  to  con- 
demn it.  Perhaps  it  may  be  mentioned  that  there  were 


CANADA  AND  LORD  DURHAM.  55 

some  who  persisted  to  the  last  in  the  belief  that  Sir 
Francis  Head  was  not  by  any  means  so  rashly  chivalrous 
as  he  had  allowed  himself  to  be  thought,  and  that  he  had 
full  preparation  made,  if  his  moral  demonstration  should 
fail,  to  supply  its  place  in  good  time  with  more  common- 
place and  effective  measures. 

The  news  of  the  outbreaks  in  Canada  created  a  natural 
excitement  in  this  country.  There  was  a  very  strong  feel- 
ing of  sympathy  among  many  classes  here — not,  indeed, 
with  the  rebellion,  but  with  the  colony  which  complained 
of  what  seemed  to  be  genuine  and  serious  grievances. 
Public  meetings  were  held  at  which  resolutions  were 
passed  ascribing  the  disturbances,  in  the  first  place,  to  the 
refusal  by  the  Government  of  any  redress  sought  for  by 
the  colonists.  Mr.  Hume,  the  pioneer  of  financial  reform, 
took  the  side  of  the  colonists  very  warmly  both  in  and  out 
of  Parliament.  During  one  of  the  Parliamentary  debates 
on  the  subject,  Sir  Robert  Peel  referred  to  the  principal 
leader  of  the  rebellion  in  Upper  Canada  as  "  a  Mr.  Mac- 
kenzie." Mr.  Hume  resented  this  way  of  speaking  of  a 
prominent  colonist,  and  remarked  that  "  there  was  a  Mr. 
Mackenzie  as  there  might  be  a  Sir  Robert  Peel,"  and 
created  some  amusement  by  referring  to  the  declarations 
of  Lord  Chatham  on  the  American  Stamp  Act,  which  he 
cited  as  the  opinion  of  "  a  Mr.  Pitt."  Lord  John  Russell, 
on  the  part  of  the  Government,  introduced  a  bill  to  deal 
with  the  rebellious  province.  The  bill  proposed,  in  brief, 
to  suspend  for  a  time  the  constitution  of  Lower  Canada, 
and  to  send  out  from  this  country  a  governor-general  and 
high-commissioner,  with  full  powers  to  deal  with  the  rebel- 
lion, and  to  remodel  the  constitution  of  both  provinces. 
The  proposal  met  with  a  good  deal  of  opposition  at  first 
on  very  different  grounds.  Mr.  Roebuck,  who  was  then, 
as  it  happened,  out  of  Parliament,  appeared  as  the  agent 
and  representative  of  the  province  of  Lower  Canada,  and 


50  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

demanded  to  be  heard  at  the  bar  of  both  the  Houses 
in  opposition  to  the  bill.  After  some  little  demur  his 
demand  was  granted,  and  he  stood  at  the  bar,  first  of  the 
Commons,  and  then  of  the  Lords,  and  opposed  the  bill  on 
the  ground  that  it  unjustly  suspended  the  constitution 
of  Lower  Canada  in  consequence  of  disturbances  provoked 
by  the  intolerable  oppression  of  the  home  Government. 
A  critic  of  that  day  remarked  that  most  orators  seemed 
to  make  it  their  business  to  conciliate  and  propitiate  the 
audience  they  desired  to  win  over,  but  that  Mr.  Roebuck 
seemed  from  the  very  first  to  be  determined  to  set  all 
his  hearers  against  him  and  his  cause.  Mr.  Roebuck's 
speeches  were,  however,  exceedingly  argumentative  and 
powerful  appeals.  Their  effect  was  enhanced  by  the 
singularly  youthful  appearance  of  the  speaker,  who  is 
described  as  looking  like  a  boy  hardly  out  of  his  teens. 

It  was  evident,  however,  that  the  proposal  of  the  Govern- 
ment must  in  the  main  be  adopted.  The  general  opinion 
of  Parliament  decided,  not  unreasonably,  that  that  was  not 
the  moment  for  entering  into  a  consideration  of  the  past 
policy  of  the  Government,  and  that  the  country  could  do 
nothing  better  just  then  than  send  out  some  man  of  com- 
manding ability  and  character  to  deal  with  the  exist- 
ing condition  of  things.  There  was  an  almost  universal 
admission  that  the  Government  had  found  the  right  man 
when  Lord  John  Russell  mentioned  the  name  of  Lord 
Durham. 

Lord  Durham  was  a  man  of  remarkable  character.  It 
is  a  matter  of  surprise  how  little  his  name  is  thought  of 
by  the  present  generation,  seeing  what  a  .strenuous  figure 
he  seemed  in  the  eyes  of  his  contemporaries,  and  how 
striking  a  part  he  played  in  the  politics  of  a  time  which 
has  even  still  some  living  representatives.  He  belonged 
to  one  of  the  oldest  families  in  England.  The  Lambtons 
had  lived  on  their  estate  in  the  North,  in  uninterrupted 


CANADA  AND  LOED  DURHAM.  57 

succession,  since  the  Conquest.  The  male  succession,  it 
is  stated,  never  was  interrupted  since  the  twelfth  century. 
They  were  not,  however,  a  family  of  aristocrats.  Their 
wealth  was  derived  chiefly  from  coal  mines,  and  grew  up 
in  later  days  ;  the  property  at  first,  and  for  a  long  time, 
was  of  inconsiderable  value.  For  more  than  a  century, 
however,  the  Lambtons  had  come  to  take  rank  among  the 
gentry  of  the  county,  and  some  member  of  the  family 
had  represented  the  city  of  Durham  in  the  House  of  Com- 
mons from  1727  until  the  early  death  of  Lord  Durham's 
father  in  December,  1797.  William  Henry  Lambton,  Lord 
Durham's  father,  was  a  stanch  Whig,  and  had  been  a 
friend  and  associate  of  Fox.  John  George  Lambton,  the 
son,  was  born  at  Lambton  Castle  in  April,  1792.  Before 
he  was  quite  twenty  years  of  age,  he  made  a  romantic 
marriage  at  Gretna  Green  with  a  lady  who  died  three  years 
after.  He  served  for  a  short  time  in  a  regiment  of  Hus- 
sars. About  a  year  after  the  death  of  his  first  wife  he 
married  the  eldest  daughter  of  Lord  Grey.  He  was  then 
only  twenty-four  years  of  age.  He  had  before  this  been 
returned  to  Parliament  for  the  county  of  Durham,  and 
he  soon  distinguished  himself  as  a  very  advanced  and 
energetic  reformer.  While  in  the  Commons  he  seldom 
addressed  the  House,  but  when  he  did  speak,  it  was  in 
support  of  some  measure  of  reform,  or  against  what  he 
conceived  to  be  antiquated  and  illiberal  legislation.  He 
brought  out  a  plan  of  his  own  for  Parliamentary  reform 
in  1821.  In  1828  he  was  raised  to  the  peerage,  with  the 
title  of  Baron  Durham.  When  the  ministry  of  Lord  Grey 
was  formed,  in  November,  1830,  Lord  Durham  became 
Lord  Privy  Seal.  He  is  said  to  have  had  an  almost  com- 
plete control  over  Lord  Grey.  .He  had  an  impassioned  and 
energetic  nature,  which  sometimes  drove  him  into  out- 
breaks of  feeling  which  most  of  his  colleagues  dreaded. 
Various  highly-colored  descriptions  of  stormy  scenes 


68  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

between  him  and  his  companions  in  office  are  given  by 
writers  of  the  time.  Lord  Durham,  his  enemies  and  some 
of  his  friends  said,  bullied  and  browbeat  his  opponents  in 
the  cabinet,  and  would  sometimes  hardly  allow  his  father- 
in-law  and  official  chief  a  chance  of  putting  hi  a  word  on 
the  other  side,  or  in  mitigation  of  his  tempestuous  mood. 
He  was  thorough  in  his  reforming  purposes,  and  would 
have  rushed  at  radical  changes  with  scanty  consideration 
for  the  time  or  for  the  temper  of  his  opponents,  lie  had 
very  little  reverence  indeed  for  what  Carlyle  calls  the 
majesty  of  custom.  Whatever  he  wished  he  strongly 
wished.  He  had  no  idea  of  reticence,  and  cared  not  much 
for  the  decorum  of  office.  It  is  not  necessary  to  believe 
all  the  stories  told  by  those  who  hated  and  dreaded  Lord 
Durham,  in  order  to  accept  the  belief  that  he  really  was 
somewhat  of  an  enfant  terrible  to  the  stately  Lord  Grey, 
and  to  the  easy-going  colleagues  who  were  by  no  means 
absolutely  eaten  up  by  their  zeal  for  reform.  In  the 
powerful  speech  which  he  delivered  hi  the  House  of  Lords 
on  the  Reform  Bill  there  is  a  specimen  of  his  eloquence 
of  denunciation  which  might  well  have  startled  listeners, 
even  in  those  days  when  the  license  of  speech  was  often 
sadly  out  of  proportion  with  its  legalized  liberty.  Lord 
Durham  was  especially  roused  to  anger  by  some  observa- 
tions made  in  the  debate  of  a  previous  night  by  the  Bishop 
of  Exeter.  He  described  the  prelate's  speech  as  an  exhibi- 
tion of  "  coarse  and  virulent  invective,  malignant  and  false 
insinuation,  the  grossest  perversions  of  historical  facts 
decked  out  with  all  the  choicest  flowers  of  pamphleteer- 
ing slang."  He  was  called  to  order  for  these  words,  and 
a  peer  moved  that  they  be  taken  down.  Lord  Durham 
was  by  no  means  dismayed.  He  coolly  declared  that  ho 
did  not  mean  to  defend  his  language  as  the  most  elegant 
or  graceful,  but  that  it  exactly  conveyed  the  ideas  regard- 
ing the  bishop  which  he  meant  to  express ;  that  he  believed 


CANADA  AND  LORD  DURHAM.  59 

the  bishop's  speech  to  contain  insinuations  which  were  as 
false  as  scandalous ;  that  he  had  said  so ;  that  he  now 
begged  leave  to  repeat  the  words,  and  that  he  paused  to 
give  any  noble  lord  who  thought  fit  an  opportunity  of 
taking  them  down.  Not  one,  however,  seemed  disposed 
to  encounter  any  further  this  impassioned  adversary,  and 
when  he  had  had  his  say,  Lord  Durham  became  somewhat 
mollified,  and  endeavored  to  soften  the  pain  of  the  impres- 
sion he  had  made.  He  begged  the  House  of  Lords  to  make 
some  allowance  for  him  if  he  had  spoken  too  warmly ;  for, 
as  he  said  with  much  pathetic  force,  his  mind  had  lately 
been  tortured  by  domestic  loss.  He  thus  alluded  to  the 
recent  death  of  his  eldest  son — "  a  beautiful  boy,"  says  a 
writer  of  some  years  ago,  "  whose  features  will  live  forever 
in  the  well-known  picture  by  Lawrence." 

The  whole  of  this  incident — the  fierce  attack  and  the 
sudden  pathetic  expression  of  regret — will  serve  well 
enough  to  illustrate  the  emotional,  uncontrolled  character 
of  Lord  Durham.  He  was  one  of  the  men  who,  even  when 
they  are  thoroughly  in  the  right,  have  often  the  unhappy 
art  of  seeming  to  put  themselves  completely  in  the  wrong. 
He  was  the  most  advanced  of  all  the  reformers  in  the 
reforming  ministry  of  Lord  Grey.  His  plan  of  Reform  in 
1821  proposed  to  give  four  hundred  members  to  certain 
districts  of  town  and  country,  in  which  every  householder 
should  have  a  vote.  When  Lord  Grey  had  formed  his 
reform  ministry,  Lord  Durham  sent  for  Lord  John  Russell 
and  requested  him  to  draw  up  a  scheme  of  reform.  A 
committee  was  formed  on  Lord  Durham's  suggestion  con- 
sisting of  Sir  James  Graham,  Lord  Duncannon,  Lord  John 
Russell,  and  Lord  Durham  himself.  Lord  John  Russell 
drew  up  a  plan,  which  he  published  long  after,  with  the 
alterations  which  Lord  Durham  had  suggested  and  written 
in  his  own  hand  on  the  margin.  If  Lord  Durham  had  had 
his  way  the  ballot  would  at  that  time  have  been  included 


CO  A  IIISTOIIY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

in  the  programme  of  the  Government ;  and  it  was,  indeed, 
understood  that  at  one  period  of  the  discussion  he  "had 
won  over  his  colleagues  to  his  opinion  on  that  subject. 
He  was,  in  a  word,  the  Radical  member  of  the  cabinet, 
with  all  the  energy  which  became  such  a  character ;  with 
that  "  magnificent  indiscretion  "  which  had  been  attributed 
to  a  greater  man — Edmund  Burke ;  with  all  that  courage 
of  his  opinions  which,  in  the  Frenchified  phraseology  of 
modern  politics,  is  so  much  talked  of,  so  rarely  found,  and 
so  little  trusted  or  successful  when  it  is  found. 

Not  long  after  Lord  Durham  was  raised  in  the  peerage 
and  became  an  earl.  His  influence  over  Lord  Grey  contin- 
ued great,  but  his  differences  of  opinion  with  his  former 
colleagues — he  had  resigned  his  office — became  greater 
and  greater  every  day.  More  than  once  he  had  taken  the 
public  into  his  confidence  in  his  characteristic  and  heed- 
less way.  He  was  sent  on  a  mission  to  Russia,  perhaps 
to  get  him  out  of  the  way,  and  afterward  he  was  made 
ambassador  at  the  Russian  court.  In  the  interval  between 
his  mission  and  his  formal  appointment  he  had  come  back 
to  England  and  performed  a  series  of  enterprises  which  in 
the  homely  and  undignified  language  of  American  politics 
would  probably  be  called  "  stumping  the  country."  He 
was  looked  to  with  much  hope  by  the  more  extreme 
Liberals  in  the  country,  and  with  corresponding  dislike 
and  dread  by  all  who  thought  the  country  had  gone  far 
enough,  or  much  too  far  in  the  recent  political  changes. 

None  of  his  opponents,  however,  denied  his  great  ability. 
He  was  never  deterred  by  conventional  beliefs  and  habits 
from  looking  boldly  into  the  very  heart  of  a  great  political 
difficulty.  He  was  never  afraid  to  propose  what;  in  times 
later  than  his,  have  been  called  heroic  remedies.  There 
was  a  general  impression,  perhaps,  even  among  those  who 
liked  him  least,  that  he  was  a  sort  of  "  unemployed  Caesar," 
a  man  who  only  required  a  field  large  enough  to  develop 


CANADA  AND  LORD  DURHAM.  61 

great  qualities  in  the  ruling  of  men.  The  difficulties  in 
Canada  seemed  to  have  come  as  if  expressly  to  give  him 
an  opportunity  of  proving  himself  all  that  his  friends 
declared  him  to  be,  or  of  justifying  forever  the  distrust  of 
his  enemies.  He  went  out  to  Canada  with  the  assurance  of 
every  one  that  his  expedition  would  either  make  or  mar 
a  career,  if  not  a  country. 

Lord  Durham  went  out  to  Canada  with  the  brightest 
hopes  and  prospects.  He  took  with  him  two  of  the  men 
best  qualified  in  England  at  that  time  to  make  his  mission 
a  success — Mr.  Charles  Buller  and  Mr.  Edward  Gibbon 
Wakefield.  He  understood  that  he  was  going  out  as  a 
dictator,  and  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  his  expedition 
was  regarded  in  this  light  by  England  and  by  the  colonies. 
We  have  remarked  that  people  looked  on  his  mission  as 
likely  to  make  or  mar  a  career,  if  not  a  country.  What 
it  did,  however,  was  somewhat  different  from  that  which 
any  one  expected.  Lord  Durham  found  out  a  new  alter- 
native. He  made  a  country,  and  he  marred  a  career.  He 
is  distinctly  the  founder  of  the  system  which  has  since 
worked  with  such  gratifying  success  in  Canada  ;  he  is  the 
founder,  even,  of  the  principle  which  allowed  the  quiet 
development  of  the  provinces  into  a  confederation  with 
neighboring  colonies  under  the  name  of  the  Dominion  of 
Canada.  But  the  singular  quality  which  in  home  politics 
had  helped  to  mar  so  much  of  Lord  Durham's  personal 
career  was  in  full  work  during  his  visit  to  Canada.  It 
would  not  be  easy  to  find  in  modern  political  history  so  curi- 
ous an  example  of  splendid  and  lasting  success  combined 
with  all  the  appearance  of  utter  and  disastrous  failure. 
The  mission  of  Lord  Durham  saved  Canada.  It  ruined  Lord 
Durham.  At  the  moment  it  seemed  to  superficial  observ- 
ers to  have  been  as  injurious  to  the  colony  as  to  the  man. 

Lord  Durham  arrived  in  Quebec  at  the  end  of  May, 
1838.  He  at  once  issued  a  proclamation,  in  style  like  that 


62  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

of  a  dictator.  It  was  not  in  any  way  unworthy  of  the 
occasion,  which  especially  called  for  the  intervention  of  a 
brave  and  enlightened  dictatorship.  He  declared  that  he 
would  unsparingly  punish  any  one  who  violated  the  laws, 
but  he  frankly  invited  the  co-operation  of  the  colonies  to 
form  a  new  system  of  government  really  suited  to  their 
wants  and  to  the  altering  conditions  of  civilization.  Un- 
fortunately, he  had  hardly  entered  on  his  work  of  dicta- 
torship when  he  found  that  he  was  no  longer  a  dictator. 
In  the  passing  of  the  Canada  Bill  through  Parliament  the 
powers  which  he  understood  were  to  be  conferred  upon 
him  had  been  considerably  reduced.  Lord  Durham  went 
to  work,  however,  as  if  he  were  still  invested  with  ab- 
solute authority  over  all  the  laws  and  conditions  of  the 
colony.  A  very  Caesar  laying  down  the  lines  for  the 
future  government  of  a  province  could  hardly  have  been 
more  boldly  arbitrary.  Let  it  be  said,  also,  that  Lord 
Durham's  arbitrariness  was  for  the  most  part  healthy  in 
effect  and  just  in  spirit.  But  it  gave  an  immense  oppor- 
tunity of  attack  on  himself  and  on  the  Government  to 
the  enemies  of  both  at  home.  Lord  Durham  had  hardly 
begun  his  work  of  reconstruction  when  his  recall  was 
clamored  for  by  vehement  voices  in  Parliament. 

Lord  Durham  began  by  issuing  a  series  of  ordinances 
intended  to  provide  for  the  security  of  Lower  Canada. 
He  proclaimed  a  very  liberal  amnesty,  to  which,  however, 
there  were  certain  exceptions.  The  leaders  of  the  rebel- 
lious movement,  Papineau  and  others,  who  had  escaped 
from  the  colony,  were  excluded  from  the  amnesty.  So 
likewise  were  certain  prisoners  who  either  had  voluntarily 
confessed  themselves  guilty  of  high- treason,  or 'had  been 
induced  to  make  such  an  acknowledgment  in  the  hope  of 
obtaining  a  mitigated  punishment.  These  Lord  Durham 
ordered  to  be  transported  to  Bermuda ;  and  for  any  of 
these,  or  of  the  leaders  who  had  escaped,  who  should  re- 


CANADA  AND  LORD  DUEUAM.  63 

turn  to  the  colony  without  permission,  he  proclaimed  that 
they  should  be  deemed  guilty  of  high-treason,  and  con- 
demned to  suffer  death.  It  needs  no  learned  legal  argu- 
ment to  prove  that  this  was  a  proceeding  not  to  be  justi- 
fied by  any  of  the  ordinary  forms  of  law.  Lord  Durham 
had  not  power  to  transport  any  one  to  Bermuda.  He  had 
no  authority  over  Bermuda ;  he  had  no  authority  which 
he  could  delegate  to  the  officials  of  Bermuda  enabling 
them  to  detain  political  prisoners.  Nor  had  he  any  power 
to  declare  that  persons  who  returned  to  the  colony  were 
to  be  liable  to  the  punishment  of  death.  It  is  not  a  capi- 
tal offence  by  any  of  the  laws  of  England  for  even  a  trans- 
ported convict  to  break  bounds  and  return  to  his  home. 
All  this  was  quite  illegal ;  that  is  to  say,  was  outside  the 
limits  of  Lord  Durham's  legal  authority.  Lord  Durham 
was  well  aware  of  the  fact.  He  had  not  for  a  moment 
supposed  that  he  was  acting  in  accordance  with  ordinary 
English  law.  He  was  acting  in  the  spirit  of  a  dictator,  at 
once  bold  and  merciful,  who  is  under  the  impression  that 
he  has  been  invested  with  extraordinary  powers  for  the 
very  reason  that  the  crisis  does  not  admit  of  the  ordinary 
operations  of  law.  For  the  decree  of  death  to  banished 
men  returning  without  permission,  he  had,  indeed,  the 
precedent  and  authority  of  acts  passed  already  by  the 
colonial  Parliament  itself  ;  but  Lord  Durham  did  not  care 
for  any  such  authority.  He  found  that  he  had  on  his 
hands  a  considerable  number  of  prisoners  whom  it  would 
be  absurd  to  put  on  trial  in  Lower  Canada  with  the  usual 
forms  of  law.  It  would  have  been  absolutely  impossible 
to  get  any  unpacked  jury  to  convict  them.  They  would 
have  been  triumphantly  acquitted.  The  authority  of  the 
Crown  would  have  been  brought  into  greater  contempt 
than  ever.  So  little  faith  had  the  colonists  in  the  im- 
partial working  of  the  ordinary  law  in  the  governor's 
hands,  that  the  universal  impression  in  Lower  Canada 


04  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

was  that  Lord  Durham  would  have  the  prisoners  tried  by 
a  packed  jury  of  his  own  officials,  convicted  as  a  matter 
of  course,  and  executed  out  of  hand.  It  was  with  amaze- 
ment people  found  that  the  new  governor  would  not  stoop 
to  the  infamy  of  packing  a  jury.  Lord  Durham  saw  no 
better  way  out  of  the  difficulty  than  to  impose  a  sort  of 
exile  on  those  who  admitted  their  connection  with  the 
rebellion,  and  to  prevent  by  the  threat  of  a  severe  penalty 
the  return  of  those  who  had  already  fled  from  the  colony. 
His  amnesty  measure  was  large  and  liberal ;  but  he  did 
not  see  that  he  could  allow  prominent  offenders  to  remain 
unrebuked  in  the  colony ;  and  to  attempt  to  bring  them  to 
trial  would  have  been  to  secure  for  them,  not  punishment, 
but  public  honor. 

Another  measure  of  Lord  Durham's  was  likewise  open 
to  the  charge  of  the  excessive  use  of  power.  The  act 
which  appointed  him  prescribed  that  he  should  be  advised 
by  a  council,  and  that  every  ordinance  of  his  should  be 
signed  by  at  least  five  of  its  members.  There  was  already 
a  council  in  existence  nominated  by  Lord  Durham's  pre- 
decessor, Sir  J.  Colborne — a  sort  of  provisional  govern- 
ment put  together  to  supply  for  the  moment  the  place  of 
the  suspended  political  constitution.  This  council  Lord 
Durham  set  aside  altogether,  and  substituted  for  it  one  of 
his  own  making,  and  composed  chiefly  of  his  secretaries 
and  the  members  of  his  staff.  In  truth,  this  was  but  a 
part  of  the  policy  which  he  had  marked  out  for  himself. 
He  was  resolved  to  play  the  game  which  he  honestly 
believed  he  could  play  better  than  any  one  else.  He  had 
in  his  mind,  partly  from  the  inspiration  of  the  gifted  and 
well-instructed  men  who  accompanied  and  advised  him,  a 
plan  which  he  was  firmly  convinced  would  be  the  salva- 
tion of  the  colony.  Events  have  proved  that  he  was  right. 
His  disposal  of  the  prisoners  was  only  a  clearing  of  the 
decks  for  the  great  action  of  remodelling  the  colony.  He 


CANADA  AND  LOED  DURHAM.  65 

did  not  allow  a  form  of  law  to  stand  between  him  and  his 
purpose.  Indeed,  as  we  have  already  said,  he  regarded 
himself  as  a  dictator  sent  out  to  reconstruct  a  whole 
system  in  the  best  way  he  could.  When  he  was  accused 
of  having  gone  beyond  the  law,  he  asked  with  a  scorn  not 
wholly  unreasonable  :  "  "What  are  the  constitutional  prin- 
ciples remaining  in  force  where  the  whole  constitution  is 
suspended?  What  principle  of  the  British  constitution 
holds  good  in  a  country  where  the  people's  money  is  taken 
from  them  without  the  people's  consent ;  where  represent- 
ative government  is  annihilated ;  where  martial  law  has 
been  the  law  of  the  land,  and  where  trial  by  jury  exists 
only  to  defeat  the  ends  of  justice,  and  to  provoke  the 
righteous  scorn  and  indignation  of  the  community  ?  " 

Still  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  a  less  impetuous  and  im- 
patient spirit  than  that  of  Lord  Durham  might  have  found 
a  way  of  beginning  his  great  reforms  without  provoking 
such  a  storm  of  hostile  criticism.  He  was,  it  must  always 
be  remembered,  a  dictator  who  only  strove  to  use  his 
powers  for  the  restoration  of  liberty  and  constitutional 
government.  His  mode  of  disposing  of  his  prisoners  was 
arbitrary  only  in  the  interests  of  mercy.  He  declared 
openly  that  he  did  not  think  it  right  to  send  to  an  ordinary 
penal  settlement,  and  thus  brand  with  infamy,  men  whom 
the  public  feeling  of  the  colony  entirely  approved,  and 
whose  cause,  until  they  broke  into  rebellion,  had  far  more  of 
right  on  its  side  than  that  of  the  authority  they  complained 
of  could  claim  to  possess.  He  sent  them  to  Bermuda 
simply  as  into  exile ;  to  remove  them  from  the  colony,  but 
nothing  more.  He  lent  the  weight  of  this  authority  to  the 
colonial  Act,  which  prescribed  the  penalty  of  death  for 
returning  to  the  colony,  because  he  believed  that  the  men 
thus  proscribed  never  would  return. 

But  his  policy  met  with  the  severest  and  most  unmeas- 
ured criticism  at  home.  If  Lord  Durham  had  been  guilty 

5 


66  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

of  the  worst  excesses  of  power  which  Burke  charged 
against  Warren  Hastings,  he  could  not  have  been  more 
fiercely  denounced  in  the  House  of  Lords.  He  was  accused 
of  having  promulgated  an  ordinance  which  would  enable 
him  to  hang  men  without  any  trial  or  form  of  trial.  None 
of  his  opponents  seemed  to  remember  that  whether  his 
disposal  of  the  prisoners  was  right  or  wrong,  it  was  only 
a  small  and  incidental  part  of  a  great  policy  covering  the 
readjustment  of  the  whole  political  and  social  system  of  a 
splendid  colony.  The  criticism  went  on  as  if  the  promul- 
gation of  the  Quebec  ordinances  was  the  be-all  and  the 
end-all  of  Lord  Durham's  mission.  His  opponents  made 
great  complaint  about  the  cost  of  his  progress  in  Canada. 
Lord  Durham  had  undoubtedly  a  lavish  taste  and  a  love 
for  something  like  Oriental  display.  He  made  his  goings 
about  in  Canada  like  a  gorgeous  royal  progress ;  yet  it  was 
well  known  that  he  took  no  remuneration  whatever  for 
himself,  and  did  not  even  accept  his  own  personal  travel- 
ling expenses.  He  afterward  stated  in  the  House  of  Lords 
that  the  visit  cost  him  personally  ten  thousand  pounds 
at  least.  Mr.  Hume,  the  advocate  of  economy,  made 
sarcastic  comment  on  the  sudden  fit  of  parsimony  which 
seemed  to  have  seized,  in  Lord  Durham's  case,  men  whom 
he  had  never  before  known  to  raise  their  voices  against 
any  prodigality  of  expenditure. 

The  ministry  was  very  weak  in  debating  power  in  the 
House  of  Lords.  Lord  Durham  had  made  enemies  there. 
The  opportunity  was  tempting  for  assailing  him  and  the 
ministry  together.  Many  of  the  criticisms  were  undoubt- 
edly the  conscientious  protests  of  men  who  saw  danger  in 
any  departure  from  the  recognized  principles  of  constitu- 
tional law.  Eminent  judges  and  lawyers  in  the  House  of 
Lords  naturally  looked,  above  all  things,  to  the  proper 
administration  of  the  law  as  it  existed.  But  it  is  hard  to 
doubt  that  political  or  personal  enmity  influenced  some  of 


CANADA  AND  LORD  DUEIIAM.  67 

the  attacks  on  Lord  Durham's  conduct.  Almost  all  the 
leading  men  in  the  House  of  Lords  were  against  him. 
Lord  Brougham  and  Lord  Lyndhurst  were  for  the  time 
leagued  in  opposition  to  the  Government  and  in  attack  on 
the  Canadian  policy.  Lord  Brougham  claimed  to  be  con- 
sistent. He  had  opposed  the  Canada  coercion  from  the 
beginning,  he  said,  and  he  opposed  illegal  attempts  to  deal 
with  Canada  now.  It  seems  a  little  hard  to  understand 
how  Lord  Brougham  could  really  have  so  far  misunder- 
stood the  purpose  of  Lord  Durham's  proclamation  as  to 
believe  that  he  proposed  to  hang  men  without  the  form  of 
law.  However  Lord  Durham  may  have  broken  the  tech- 
nical rules  of  law,  nothing  could  be  more  obvious  than  the 
fact  that  he  did  so  in  the  interest  of  mercy  and  generosity, 
and  not  that  of  tyrannical  severity.  Lord  Brougham 
inveighed  against  him  with  thundering  eloquence,  as  if  he 
were  denouncing  another  Sejanus.  It  must  be  owned 
that  his  attacks  lost  some  of  their  moral  effect  because  of 
his  known  hatred  to  Lord  Melbourne  and  the  ministry, 
and  even  to  Lord  Durham  himself.  People  said  that 
Brougham  had  a  special  reason  for  feeling  hostile  to 
anything  done  by  Lord  Durham.  A  dinner  was  given  to 
Lord  Grey  by  the  Reformers  of  Edinburgh,  in  1834,  at 
which  Lord  Brougham  and  Lord  Durham  were  both 
present.  Brougham  was  called  upon  to  speak,  and  in  the 
course  of  his  speech  he  took  occasion  to  condemn  certain 
too-zealous  Reformers  who  could  not  be  content  with  the 
changes  that  had  been  made,  but  must  demand  that  the 
ministry  should  rush  forward  into  wild  and  extravagant 
enterprises.  He  enlarged  upon  this  subject  with  great 
vivacity  and  with  amusing  variety  of  humorous  and 
rhetorical  illustration.  Lord  Durham  assumed  that  the 
attack  was  intended  for  him.  His  assumption  was  not 
unnatural.  When  he  came  in  his  turn  to  speak,  he  was 
indiscreet  enough  to  reply  directly  to  Lord  Brougham,  to 


68  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

accept  the  speech  of  the  former  as  a  personal  challenge, 
and  in  bitter  words  to  retort  invective  and  sarcasm.  The 
scene  was  not  edifying.  The  guests  were  scandalized. 
The  effect  of  Brougham's  speech  was  wholly  spoiled. 
Brougham  was  made  to  seem  a  disturber  of  order  by  the 
indiscretion  which  provoked  into  retort  a  man  notoriously 
indiscreet  and  incapable  of  self-restraint.  It  is  not  unfair 
to  the  memory  of  so  fierce  and  unsparing  a  political 
gladiator  as  Lord  Brougham,  to  assume  that  when  he  felt 
called  upon  to  attack  the  Canadian  policy  of  Lord  Dur- 
ham, the  recollection  of  the  scene  at  the  Edinburgh  dinner 
inspired  with  additional  force  his  criticism  of  the  Quebec 
ordinances. 

The  ministry  were  weak,  and  yielded.  They  had  in  the 
first  instance  approved  of  the  ordinances,  but  they  quickly 
gave  way  and  abandoned  them.  They  avoided  a  direct 
attempt  on  the  part  of  Lord  Brougham  to  reverse  the 
policy  of  Lord  Durham  by  announcing  that  they  had 
determined  to  disallow  the  Quebec  ordinances.  Lord  Dur- 
ham learned  for  the  first  time  from  an  American  paper 
that  the  Government  had  abandoned  him.  He  at  once 
announced  his  determination  to  give  up  his  position  and 
to  return  to  England.  His  letter  announcing  this  resolve 
crossed  on  the  ocean  the  dispatch  from  home  disallow- 
ing his  ordinances.  With  characteristic  imprudence,  he 
issued  a  proclamation  from  the  Castle  of  St.  Louis,  in  the 
city  of  Quebec,  which  was  virtually  an  appeal  to  the  public 
feeling  of  the  colony  against  the  conduct  of  her  Majesty's 
Government.  When  the  news  of  this  extraordinary  pro- 
clamation reached  home,  Lord  Durham  was  called  by  the 
Times  newspaper  "  the  Lord  High  Seditioner."  The  rep- 
resentative of  the  sovereign,  it  was  said,  had  appealed 
to  the  judgment  of  a  still  rebellious  colony  against  the 
policy  of  the  sovereign's  own  advisers.  Of  course  Lord 
Durham's  recall  was  unavoidable.  The  Government  at 


CANADA  AND  LORD  DUEHAM.  69 

once  sent  out  a  dispatch  removing  him  from  his  place  as 
Governor  of  British  North  America. 

Lord  Durham  had  not  waited  for  the  formal  recall.  He 
returned  to  England  a  disgraced  man.  Yet  even  then  there 
was  public  spirit  enough  among  the  English  people  to 
refuse  to  ratify  any  sentence  of  disgrace  upon  him.  When 
he  landed  at  Plymouth  he  was  received  with  acclamations 
by  the  population,  although  the  Government  had  prevented 
any  of  the  official  honor  usually  shown  to  returning  gov- 
ernors from  being  offered  to  him.  Mr.  John  Stuart  Mill 
has  claimed  with  modest  firmness  and  with  perfect  justice 
a  leading  share  in  influencing  public  opinion  in  favor  of 
Lord  Durham.  "  Lord  Durham,"  he  says  in  his  autobiog- 
raphy, "  was  bitterly  attacked  from  all  sides,  inveighed 
against  by  enemies,  given  up  by  timid  friends  ;  while  those 
who  would  willingly  have  defended  him  did  not  know  what 
to  say.  He  appeared  to  be  returning  a  defeated  and  dis- 
credited man.  I  had  followed  the  Canadian  events  from 
the  beginning ;  I  had  been  one  of  the  prompters  of  his 
prompters ;  his  policy  was  almost  exactly  what  mine 
would  have  been,  and  I  was  in  a  position  to  defend  it.  I 
wrote  and  published  a  manifesto  in  the  [Westminster] 
Review,  in  which  I  took  the  very  highest  ground  in  his 
behalf,  claiming  for  him  not  mere  acquittal,  but  praise  and 
honor.  Instantly  a  number  of  other  writers  took  up  the 
tone.  I  believe  there  was  a  portion  of  truth  in  what  Lord 
Durham  soon  after,  with  polite  exaggeration,  said  to  me, 
that  to  this  article  might  be  ascribed  the  almost  triumphal 
reception  which  he  met  with  on  his  arrival  in  England. 
I  believe  it  to  have  been  the  word  in  season,  which  at  a 
critical  moment  does  much  to  decide  the  results  ;  the  touch 
which  determines  whether  a  stone  set  in  motion  at  the  top 
of  an  eminence  shall  roll  down  on  one  side  or  on  the  other. 
All  hopes  connected  with  Lord  Durham  as  a  politician 
soon  vanished ;  but  with  regard  to  Canadian  and  generally 


70  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

to  colonial  policy  the  cause  was  gained.  Lord  Durham's 
report,  written  by  Charles  Duller,  partly  under  the  inspira- 
tion of  Wakefleld,  begun  a  new  era ;  its  recommendations, 
extending  to  complete  internal  self-government,  were  in 
full  operation  in  Canada  within  two  or  three  years,  and 
have  been  since  extended  to  nearly  all  the  other  colonies 
of  European  race  which  have  any  claim  to  the  character 
of  important  communities."  In  this  instance  the  victa 
causa  pleased  not  only  Cato,  but,  in  the  end,  the  gods  as 
well. 

Lord  Durham's  report  was  acknowledged  by  enemies 
as  well  as  by  the  most  impartial  critics  to  be  a  masterly 
document.  As  Mr.  Mill  has  said,  it  laid  the  foundation  of 
the  political  success  and  social  prosperity  not  only  of  Can- 
ada but  of  all  the  other  important  colonies.  After  hav- 
ing explained  in  the  most  exhaustive  manner  the  causes 
of  discontent  and  backwardness  in  Canada,  it  went  on  to 
recommend  that  the  government  of  the  colony  should  be 
put  as  much  as  possible  into  the  hands  of  the  colonists 
themselves,  that  they  themselves  should  execute  as  well 
as  make  the  laws,  the  limit  of  the  Imperial  Government's 
interference  being  in  such  matters  as  affect  the  relations 
of  the  colony  with  the  mother-country,  such  as  the  con- 
stitution and  form  of  government,  the  regulation  of  foreign 
relations  and  trade,  and  the  disposal  of  the  public  lands. 
Lord  Durham  proposed  to  establish  a  thoroughly  good 
system  of  municipal  institutions  ;  to  secure  the  indepen- 
dence of  the  judges ;  to  make  all  provincial  officers,  except 
the  governor  and  his  secretary,  responsible  to  the  colonial 
legislature ;  and  to  repeal  all  former  legislation  with  re- 
spect to  the  reserves  of  land  for  the  clergy.  Finally,  he 
proposed  that  the  provinces  of  Canada  should  be  reunited 
politically  and  should  become  one  legislature,  containing 
the  representatives  of  both  races  and  of  all  districts.  It 
is  significant  that  the  report  also  recommended  that  in  any 


CANADA  AND  LOUD  DUEIIAM.  71 

act  to  be  introduced  for  this  purpose,  a  provision  should 
be  made  by  which  all  or  any  of  the  other  North  American 
colonies  should,  on  the  application  of  their  legislatures  and 
with  the  consent  of  Canada,  be  admitted  into  the  Canadian 
Union.  Thus  the  separation  which  Fox  thought  unwise 
was  to  be  abolished,  and  the  Canadas  were  to  be  fused 
into  one  system,  which  Lord  Durham  would  have  had  a 
federation.  In  brief,  Lord  Durham  proposed  to  make  the 
Canadas  self-governing  as  regards  their  internal  affairs, 
and  the  germ  of  a  federal  union.  It  is  not  necessary  to 
describe  in  detail  the  steps  by  which  the  Government  grad- 
ually introduced  the  recommendations  of  Lord  Durham 
to  Parliament  and  carried  them  to  success.  Lord  Glenelg, 
one  of  the  feeblest  and  most  apathetic  of  colonial  secreta- 
ries, had  retired  from  office,  partly,  no  doubt,  because  of 
the  attacks  in  Parliament  on  his  administration  of  Cana- 
dian affairs.  He  was  succeeded  at  the  Colonial  Office  by 
Lord  ISTormanby,  and  Lord  Normanby  gave  way  in  a  few 
months  to  Lord  John  Russell,  who  was  full  of  energy  and 
earnestness.  Lord  Durham's  successor  and  disciple  in  the 
work  of  Canadian  government,  Lord  Sydenham — best 
known  as  Mr.  Charles  Poulett  Thomson,  one  of  the 
pioneers  of  free-trade — received  Lord  John  Russell's  cor- 
dial co-operation  and  support.  Lord  John  Russell  intro- 
duced into  the  House  of  Commons  a  bill  which  he  described 
as  intended  to  lay  the  foundation  of  a  permanent  settle- 
ment of  the  affairs  of  Canada.  The  measure  was  post- 
poned for  a  session  because  some  statesmen  thought  that 
it  would  not  be  acceptable  to  the  Canadians  themselves. 
Some  little  sputterings  of  the  rebellion  had  also  lingered 
after  Lord  Durham's  return  to  this  country,  and  these  for 
a  short  time  had  directed  attention  away  from  the  policy 
of  reorganization.  In  1840,  however,  the  Act  was  passed 
which  reunited  Upper  and  Lower  Canada  on  the  basis 
proposed  by  Lord  Durham.  Further  legislation  disposed 


72  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

of  the  clergy  reserve  lands  for  the  general  benefit  of  all 
churches  and  denominations.  The  way  was  made  clear 
for  that  scheme  which  in  times  nearer  to  our  own  has 
formed  the  Dominion  of  Canada. 

Lord  Durham  did  not  live  to  see  the  success  of  the 
policy  he  had  recommended.  We  may  anticipate  the  close 
of  his  career.  "Within  a  few  days  after  the  passing  of  the 
Canada  Government  Bill  he  died  at  Cowes,  in  the  Isle  of 
Wight,  on  July  28th,  1840.  He  was  then  little  more  than 
forty-eight  years  of  age.  He  had  for  some  time  been  in 
failing  health,  and  it  cannot  be  doubted  that  the  mortifi- 
cation attending  his  Canadian  mission  had  worn  away 
his  strength.  His  proud  and  sensitive  spirit  could  ill 
bear  the  contradictions  and  humiliations  that  had  been 
forced  upon  him.  His  was  an  eager  and  a  passionate 
nature,  full  of  that  sceva  indignatio  which,  by  his  own 
acknowledgment,  tortured  the  heart  of  Swift.  He  wanted 
to  the  success  of  his  political  career  that  proud  patience 
which  the  gods  are  said  to  love,  and  by  virtue  of  which 
great  men  live  down  misappreciation,  and  hold  out  until 
they  see  themselves  justified  and  hear  the  reproaches 
turn  into  cheers.  But  if  Lord  Durham's  personal  career 
was  hi  any  way  a  failure,  his  policy  for  the  Canadas  was  a 
splendid  success.  It  established  the  principles  of  colonial 
government.  There  were  undoubtedly  defects  in  the 
construction  of  the  actual  scheme  which  Lord  Durham 
initiated,  and  which  Lord  Sydenham,  who  died  not  long 
after  him,  instituted.  The  legislative  union  of  the  two 
Canadas  was  in  itself  a  makeshift,  and  was  only  adopted 
as  such.  Lord  Durham  would  have  had  it  otherwise  if 
he  might ;  but  he  did  not  see  his  way  then  to  anything 
like  the  complete  federation  scheme  afterward  adopted. 
But  the  success  of  the  policy  lay  in  the  broad  principles 
it  established,  and  to  which  other  colonial  systems  as 
well  as  that  of  the  Dominion  of  Canada  owe  their  strength 


CANADA  AND  LORD  DURHAM.  73 

and  security  to-day.  One  may  say,  with  little  help  from 
the  merely  fanciful,  that  the  rejoicings  of  emancipated 
colonies  might  have  been  in  his  dying  ears  as  he  sank 
into  his  early  grave. 


74.  -4  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIME. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

SCIENCE   AND   SPEED. 

THE  opening  of  the  reign  of  Queen  Victoria  coincided 
with  the  introduction  of  many  of  the  great  discoveries 
and  applications  in  science,  industry,  and  commerce  which 
we  consider  specially  representative  of  modern  civiliza- 
tion. A  reign  which  saw  in  its  earlier  years  the  applica- 
tion of  the  electric  current  to  the  task  of  transmitting 
messages,  the  first  successful  attempts  to  make  use  of 
steam  for  the  business  of  transatlantic  navigation,  the 
general  development  of  the  railway  system  all  over  these 
countries,  and  in  the  introduction  of  the  penny-post,  must 
be  considered  to  have  obtained  for  itself,  had  it  secured 
no  other  memorials,  an  abiding  place  in  history.  A  dis- 
tinguished author  has  lately  inveighed  against  the  spirit 
which  would  rank  such  improvements  as  those  just  men- 
tioned with  the  genuine  triumphs  of  the  human  race, 
and  has  gone  so  far  as  to  insist  that  there  is  nothing 
in  any  such  which  might  not  be  expected  from  the  self- 
interested  contrivings  of  a  very  inferior  animal  nature. 
Amidst  the  tendency  to  glorify  beyond  measure  the  mere 
mechanical  improvements  of  modern  civilization,  it  is 
natural  that  there  should  arise  some  angry  questioning, 
some  fierce  disparagement  of  all  that  it  has  done.  There 
will  always  be  natures  to  which  the  philosophy  of  con- 
templation must  seem  far  nobler  than  the  philosophy 
which  expresses  itself  hi  mechanical  action.  It  may,  how- 


SCIENCE  AND  SPEED.  75 

ever,  be  taken  as  certain  that  no  people  who  were  ever 
great  in  thought  and  in  art  wilfully  neglected  to  avail 
themselves  of  all  possible  contrivances  for  making  life 
less  laborious  by  the  means  of  mechanical  and  artificial 
contrivance.  The  Greeks  were,  to  the  best  of  their  oppor- 
tunity, and  when  at  the  highest  point  of  their  glory  as  an 
artistic  race,  as  eager  for  the  application  of  all  scientific 
and  mechanical  contrivances  to  the  business  of  life  as  the 
most  practical  and  boastful  Manchester  man  or  Chicago 
man  of  our  own  day.  We  shall  afterward  see  that  the 
reign  of  Queen  Victoria  came  to  have  a  literature,  an  art, 
and  a  philosophy  distinctly  its  own.  For  the  moment  we 
have  to  do  with  its  industrial  science ;  or,  at  least,  with 
the  first  remarkable  movements  in  that  direction  which 
accompanied  the  opening  of  the  reign.  This  at  least  must 
be  said  for  them,  that  they  have  changed  the  conditions 
of  human  life  for  us  in  such  a  manner  as  to  make  the 
history  of  the  past  forty  or  fifty  years  almost  absolutely 
distinct  from  that  of  any  preceding  period.  In  all  that 
part  of  our  social  life  which  is  affected  by  industrial  and 
mechanical  appliances,  the  man  of  the  latter  part  of  the 
eighteenth  century  was  less  widely  removed  from  the 
Englishman  of  the  days  of  the  Paston  Letters  than  we  are 
removed  from  the  ways  of  the  eighteenth  century.  The 
man  of  the  eighteenth  century  travelled  on  land  and  sea 
in  much  the  same  way  that  his  forefathers  had  done  hun- 
dreds of  years  before.  His  communications  by  letter  with 
his  fellows  were  carried  on  in  very  much  the  same  method. 
He  got  his  news  from  abroad  and  at  home  after  the  same 
slow,  uncertain  fashion.  His  streets  and  houses  were 
lighted  very  much  as  they  might  have  been  when  Mr. 
Pepys  was  in  London.  His  ideas  of  drainage  and  ventila- 
tion were  equally  elementary  and  simple.  We  see  a  com- 
plete revolution  in  all  these  things.  A  man  of  the  present 
day  suddenly  thrust  back  fifty  years  in  life  would  find 


76  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

himself  almost  as  awkwardly  unsuited  to  the  ways  of  that 
time  as  if  he  were  sent  back  to  the  age  when  the  Romans 
occupied  Britain.  He  would  find  himself  harassed  at 
every  step  he  took.  He  could  do  hardly  anything  as  he 
does  it  to-day.  Whatever  the  moral  and  philosophical 
value  of  the  change  in  the  eyes  of  thinkers  too  lofty  to 
concern  themselves  with  the  common  ways  and  doings  of 
human  life,  this  is  certain  at  least,  that  the  change  is  of 
immense  historical  importance ;  and  that  even  if  we  look 
upon  life  as  a  mere  pageant  and  show,  interesting  to  wise 
men  only  by  its  curious  changes,  a  wise  man  of  this  school 
could  hardly  have  done  better,  if  the  choice  lay  with  him, 
than  to  desire  that  the  lines  of  his  life  might  be  so  cast  as 
to  fall  into  the  earlier  part  of  this  present  reign. 

It  is  a  somewhat  curious  coincidence  that  in  the  year 
when  Professor  Wheatstone  and  Mr.  Cooke  took  out  their 
first  patent  "for  improvements  in  giving  signals  and 
sounding  alarms  in  distant  places  by  means  of  electric 
currents  transmitted  through  metallic  circuit,"  Professor 
Morse,  the  American  electrician,  applied  to  Congress  for 
aid  hi  the  construction  and  carrying  on  of  a  small  electric 
telegraph  to  convey  messages  a  short  distance,  and  made 
the  application  without  success.  In  the  following  year  he 
came  to  this  country  to  obtain  a  patent  for  his  invention ; 
but  he  was  refused.  He  had  come  too  late.  Our  own 
countrymen  were  beforehand  with  him.  Very  soon  after 
we  find  experiments  made  with  the  electric  telegraph 
between  Euston  Square  and  Camden  Town.  These  experi- 
ments were  made  under  the  authority  of  the  London  and 
North-western  Railway  Company,  immediately  on  the 
taking  out  of  the  patent  by  Messrs.  Wheatstone  and 
Cooke.  Mr.  Robert  Stephenson  was  one  of  those  who 
came  to  watch  the  operation  of  this  new  and  wonderful 
attempt  to  make  the  currents  of  the  air  man's  faithful 
Ariel.  The  London  and  Birmingham  Railway  was  opened 


SCIENCE  AND  SPEED.  77 

through  its  whole  length  in  1838.  The  Liverpool  and 
Preston  line  was  opened  in  the  same  year.  The  Liver- 
pool and  Birmingham  had  been  opened  in  the  year  before ; 
the  London  and  Croydon  was  opened  the  year  after.  The 
Act  for  the  transmission  of  the  mails  by  railways  was 
passed  in  1838.  In  the  same  year  it  was  noted  as  an  un- 
paralleled, and  to  many  an  almost  incredible,  triumph  of 
human  energy  and  science  over  time  and  space,  that  a 
locomotive  had  been  able  to  travel  at  a  speed  of  thirty- 
seven  miles  an  hour. 

"  The  prospect  of  travelling  from  the  metropolis  to  Liver- 
pool, a  distance  of  two  hundred  and  ten  miles,  in  ten  hours, 
calls  forcibly  to  mind  the  tales  of  fairies  and  genii  by  which 
we  were  amused  in  our  youth,  and  contrasts  forcibly  with 
the  fact,  attested  on  the  personal  experience  of  the  writer 
of  this  notice,  that  about  the  commencement  of  the  pres- 
ent century  this  same  journey  occupied  a  space  of  sixty 
hours."  These  are  the  words  of  a  writer  who  gives  an 
interesting  account  of  the  railways  of  England  during  the 
first  year  of  the  reign  of  Queen  Victoria.  In  the  same 
volume  from  which  this  extract  is  taken  an  allusion  is 
made  to  the  possibility  of  steam  communication  being 
successfully  established  between  England  and  the  United 
States.  "  Preparations  on  a  gigantic  scale,"  a  writer  is  able 
to  announce,  "  are  now  in  a  state  of  great  forwardness  for 
trying  an  experiment  in  steam  navigation  which  has  been 
the  subject  of  much  controversy  among  scientific  men. 
Ships  of  an  enormous  size,  furnished  with  steam-power 
equal  to  the  force  of  four  hundred  horses  and  upward, 
will,  before  our  next  volume  shall  be  prepared,  have  prob- 
ably decided  the  question  whether  this  description  of 
vessels  can,  in  the  present  state  of  our  knowledge,  profit- 
ably engage  in  transatlantic  voyages.  It  is  possible  that 
these  attempts  may  fail — a  result  which  is  indeed  predicted 
by  high  authorities  on  this  subject.  We  are  more  san- 


78  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

guine  in  our  hopes ;  but  should  these  be  disappointed,  we 
cannot,  if  we  are  to  judge  from  our  past  progress,  doubt 
that  longer  experience  and  a  further  application  of  inven- 
tive genius  will,  at  no  very  distant  day,  render  practicable 
and  profitable  by  this  means  the  longest  voyages  in  which 
the  adventurous  spirit  of  man  will  lead  him  to  embark." 
The  experiment  thus  alluded  to  was  made  with  perfect 
success.  The  /Sirius,  the  Great  Western,  and  the  Royal 
William  accomplished  voyages  between  New  York  and 
this  country  in  the  early  part  of  1838;  and  it  was 
remarked  that  "  Transatlantic  voyages  by  means  of  steam 
may  now  be  said  to  be  as  easy  of  accomplishment,  with 
ships  of  adequate  size  and  power,  as  the  passage  between 
London  and  Margate."  The  Great  Western  crossed  the 
ocean  from  Bristol  to  New  York  in  fifteen  days.  She  was 
followed  by  the  Sirius,  which  left  Cork  for  New  York, 
and  made  the  passage  in  seventeen  days.  The  controversy 
as  to  the  possibility  of  such  voyages,  which  was  settled  by 
the  Great  Western  and  the  Sirius,  had  no  reference  to  the 
actual  safety  of  such  an  experiment.  During  seven  years 
the  mails  for  the  Mediterranean  had  been  despatched  by 
means  of  steamers.  The  doubt  was  as  to  the  possibility 
of  stowing  in  a  vessel  so  large  a  quantity  of  coal  or  other 
fuel  as  would  enable  her  to  accomplish  her  voyage  across 
the  Atlantic,  where  there  could  be  no  stopping-place  and 
no  possibility  of  taking  in  new  stores.  It  was  found, 
to  the  delight  of  all  those  who  believed  in  the  practicability 
of  the  enterprise,  that  the  quantity  of  fuel  which  each 
vessel  had  on  board  when  she  left  her  port  of  departure 
proved  amply  sufficient  for  the  completion  of  the  voyage. 
Neither  the  Sirius  nor  the  Great  Western  was  the  first 
vessel  to  cross  the  Atlantic  by  means  of  steam  propulsion. 
Nearly  twenty  years  before,  a  vessel  called  the  Savannah, 
built  at  New  York,  crossed  the  ocean  to  Liverpool ;  and 
some  years  later  an  English-built  steamer  made  several 


SCIENCE  AND  SPEED.  79 

voyages  between  Holland  and  the  Dutch  West  Indian 
colonies  as  a  packet  vessel  in  the  service  of  that  Govern- 
ment. Indeed,  a  voyage  had  been  made  round  the  Cape 
of  Good  Hope  more  lately  still  by  a  steamship.  These 
expeditions,  however,  had  really  little  or  nothing  to  do 
with  the  problem  which  was  solved  by  the  voyages  of  the 
/Sirius  and  the  Great  Western.  In  the  former  instances 
the  steam-power  was  employed  merely  as  an  auxiliary. 
The  vessel  made  as  much  use  of  her  steam  propulsion  as 
she  could,  but  she  had  to  rely  a  good  deal  on  her  capacity 
as  a  sailer.  This  was  quite  a  different  thing  from  the 
enterprise  of  the  Sirius  and  the  Great  Western,  which 
was  to  cross  the  ocean  by  steam  propulsion,  and  steam 
propulsion  only.  It  is  evident  that,  so  long'  as  the  steam- 
power  was  to  be  used  only  as  an  auxiliary,  it  would  be 
impossible  to  reckon  on  speed  and  certainty  of  arrival. 
The  doubt  was  whether  a  steamer  could  carry,  with  her 
cargo  and  passengers,  fuel  enough  to  serve  for  the  whole 
of  her  voyage  across  the  Atlantic.  The  expeditions  of  the 
Sirius  and  the  Great  Western  settled  the  whole  question. 
It  was  never  again  a  matter  of  controversy.  It  is  enough 
to  say  that  two  years  after  the  Great  Western  went  out 
from  Bristol  to  New  York  the  Cunardline  of  steamers  was 
established.  The  steam  communication  between  Liverpool 
and  New  York  became  thenceforth  as  regular  and  as  un- 
varying a  part  of  the  business  of  commerce  as  the  journeys 
of  the  trains  on  the  Great  Western  Railway  between 
London  and  Bristol.  It  was  not  Bristol  which  benefited 
most  by  the  transatlantic  voyages.  They  made  the  great- 
ness of  Liverpool.  Year  by  year  the  sceptre  of  the 
commercial  marine  passed  away  from  Bristol  to  Liverpool. 
No  port  in  the  world  can  show  a  line  of  docks  like  those 
of  Liverpool.  There  the  stately  Mersey  flows  for  miles 
between  the  superb  and  massive  granite  walls  of  the 
enclosures  within  whose  shelter  the  ships  of  the  world  are 


80  A  UISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

arrayed,  as  if  on  parade,  for  the  admiration  of  the  traveller 
who  has  hitherto  been  accustomed  to  the  irregular  and 
straggling  arrangements  of  the  docks  of  London  or  of  New 
York. 

On  July  5th,  1839,  an  unusually  late  period  of  the 
year,  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  brought  forward 
his  annual  budget.  The  most  important  part  of  the  finan- 
cial statement,  so  far  as  later  times  are  concerned,  is  set 
out  in  a  resolution  proposed  by  the  finance  minister, 
which,  perhaps,  represents  the  greatest  social  improve- 
ment brought  about  by  legislation  in  modern  times.  The 
Chancellor  proposed  a  resolution  declaring  that  "it  is  ex- 
pedient to  reduce  the  postage  on  letters  to  one  uniform 
rate  of  one  penny  charged  upon  every  letter  of  a  weight 
to  be  hereafter  fixed  by  law ;  Parliamentary  privileges  of 
franking  being  abolished  and  official  franking  strictly  reg- 
ulated; this  House  pledging  itself  at  the  same  time  to 
make  good  any  deficiency  of  revenue  which  may  be  occa- 
sioned by  such  an  alteration  in  the  rates  of  the  existing 
duties."  Up  to  this  time  the  rates  of  postage  had  been 
both  high  and  various.  They  were  varying  both  as  to 
distance  and  as  to  the  weight  and  even  the  size  or  the 
shape  of  a  letter.  The  district  or  London  post  was  a 
separate  branch  of  the  postal  department ;  and  the  charge 
for  the  transmission  of  letters  was  made  on  a  different 
scale  in  London  from  that  which  prevailed  between  town 
and  town.  The  average  postage  on  every  chargeable 
letter  throughout  the  United  Kingdom  was  sixpence  far- 
thing. A  letter  from  London  to  Brighton  cost  eight- 
pence;  to  Aberdeen  one  shilling  and  threepence  half- 
penny ;  to  Belfast  one  shilling  and  f ourpence.  Nor  was 
this  all ;  for  if  the  letter  were  written  on  more  than  one 
sheet  of  paper,  it  came  under  the  operation  of  a  higher 
scale  of  charge.  Members  of  Parliament  had  the  privilege 
of  franking  letters  to  a  certain  limited  extent ;  members 


SCIENCE  AND  SPEED.  81 

of  the  Government  had  the  privilege  of  franking  to  an  un- 
limited extent.  It  is,  perhaps,  as  well  to  mention,  for  the 
sake  of  being  intelligible  to  all  readers  in  an  age  which 
has  not,  in  this  country  at  least,  known  practically  the 
beauty  and  liberality  of  the  franking  privilege,  that  it  con- 
sisted in  the  right  of  the  privileged  person  to  send  his 
own  or  any  other  person's  letters  through  the  post  free  of 
charge  by  merely  writing  his  name  on  the  outside.  This 
meant,  in  plain  words,  that  the  letters  of  the  class  who 
could  best  afford  to  pay  for  them  went  free  of  charge,  and 
that  those  who  could  least  afford  to  pay  had  to  pay 
double — the  expense,  that  is  to  say,  of  carrying  their  own 
letters  and  the  letters  of  the  privileged  and  exempt. 

The  greatest  grievances  were  felt  everywhere  because 
of  this  absurd  system.  It  had  along  with  its  other  disad- 
vantages that  of  encouraging  what  may  be  called  the 
smuggling  of  letters.  Everywhere  sprang  up  organiza- 
tions for  the  illicit  conveyance  of  correspondence  at  lower 
rates  than  those  imposed  by  the  Government.  The  pro- 
prietors of  almost  every  kind  of  public  conveyance  are 
said  to  have  been  engaged  in  this  unlawful  but  certainly 
not  very  unnatural  or  unjustifiable  traffic.  Five-sixths 
of  all  the  letters  sent  between  Manchester  and  London 
were  said  to  have  been  conveyed  for  years  by  this  process. 
One  great  mercantile  house  was  proved  to  have  been  in 
the  habit  of  sending  sixty-seven  letters  by  what  we  may 
call  this  underground  post-office  for  every  one  on  which 
they  paid  the  Government  charges.  It  was  not  merely  to 
escape  heavy  cost  that  these  stratagems  were  employed. 
As  there  was  an  additional  charge  when  a  letter  was 
written  on  more  sheets  than  one,  there  was  a  frequent 
and  almost  a  constant  tampering  by  officials  with  the 
sanctity  of  sealed  letters  for  the  purpose  of  ascertaining 
whether  or  not  they  ought  to  be  taxed  on  the  higher  scale. 
It  was  proved  that  in  the  years  between  1815  and  1835, 

6 


82  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

while  the  population  had  increased  thirty  per  cent.,  and 
the  stage-coach  duty  had  increased  one  hundred  and 
twenty-eight  per  cent.,  the  Post-Office  revenues  had  shown 
no  increase  at  all.  In  other  countries  the  postal  revenue 
had  been  on  the  increase  steadily  during  that  time ;  in 
the  United  States  the  revenue  had  actually  trebled, 
although  then  and  later  the  postal  system  of  America  was 
full  of  faults  which  at  that  day  only  seemed  intelligible 
or  excusable  when  placed  in  comparison  with  those  of 
our  own  system. 

Mr.  (afterward  Sir  Rowland)  Hill  is  the  man  to  whom 
this  country,  and,  indeed,  all  civilization,  owes  the  adop- 
tion of  the  cheap  and  uniform  system.  His  plan  has  been 
adopted  by  every  state  which  professes  to  have  a  postal 
system  at  all.  Mr.  Hill  belonged  to  a  remarkable  family. 
His  father,  Thomas  Wright  Hill,  was  a  teacher,  a  man 
of  advanced  and  practical  views  in  popular  education,  a 
devoted  lover  of  science,  an  advocate  of  civil  and  reli- 
gious liberty,  and  a  sort  of  celebrity  in  the  Birmingham 
of  his  day,  where  he  took  a  bold  and  active  part  in  try- 
ing to  defend  the  house  of  Dr.  Priestley  against  the  mob 
who  attacked  it.  He  had  five  sons,  every  one  of  whom 
made  himself  more  or  less  conspicuous  as  a  practical 
reformer  in  one  path  or  another.  The  eldest  of  the  sons 
was  Matthew  Davenport  Hill,  the  philanthropic  recorder 
of  Birmingham,  who  did  so  much  for  prison  reform  and 
for  the  reclamation  of  juvenile  offenders.  The  third  son 
was  Rowland  Hill,  the  author  of  the  cheap  postal  system. 
Rowland  Hill  when  a  little  weakly  child  began  to  show 
some  such  precocious  love  for  arithmetical  calculations 
as  Pascal  showed  for  mathematics.  His  favorite  amuse- 
ment, as  a  child,  was  to  lie  on  the  hearth-rug  and  count 
up  figures  by  the  hour  together.  As  he  grew  up  he 
became  teacher  of  mathematics  in  his  father's  school. 
Afterward  he  was  appointed  Secretary  to  the  South  Aus- 


SCIENCE  AND  SPEED.  83 

tralian  Commission,  and  rendered  much  valuable  service 
in  the  organization  of  the  colony  of  South  Australia.  His 
early  love  of  masses  of  figures  it  may  have  been  which 
in  the  first  instance  turned  his  attention  to  the  number 
of  letters  passing  through  the  Post-office,  the  proportion 
they  bore  to  the  number  of  the  population,  the  cost  of 
carrying  them,  and  the  amount  which  the  Post-office 
authorities  charged  for  the  conveyance  of  a  single  let- 
ter. A  picturesque  and  touching  little  illustration  of  the 
veritable  hardships  of  the  existing  system  seems  to  have 
quickened  his  interest  in  a  reform  of  it.  Miss  Martineau 
thus  tells  the  story : 

"  Coleridge,  when  a  young  man,  was  walking  through 
the  Lake  district,  when  he  one  day  saw  the  postman 
deliver  a  letter  to  a  woman  at  a  cottage  door.  The 
woman  turned  it  over  and  examined  it,  and  then  returned 
it,  saying  she  could  not  pay  the  postage,  which  was  a 
shilling.  Hearing  that  the  •  letter  was  from  her  brother, 
Coleridge  paid  the  postage,  in  spite  of  the  manifest  un- 
willingness of  the  woman.  As  soon  as  the  postman  was 
out  of  sight  she  showed  Coleridge  how  his  money  had 
been  wasted  as  far  as  she  was  concerned.  The  sheet 
was  blank.  There  was  an  agreement  between  her  brother 
and  herself  that  as  long  as  all  went  well  with  him  he 
should  send  a  blank  sheet  in  this  way  once  a  quarter; 
and  she  thus  had  tidings  of  him  without  expense  of 
postage.  Most  persons  would  have  remembered  this  in- 
cident as  a  curious  story  to  tell ;  but  there  was  one  mind 
which  wakened  up  at  once  to  a  sense  of  the  significance 
of  the  fact.  It  struck  Mr.  Rowland  Hill  that  there  must 
be  something  wrong  in  a  system  which  drove  a  brother 
and  sister  to  cheating,  in  order  to  gratify  their  desire  to 
hear  of  one  another's  welfare." 

Mr.  Hill  gradually  worked  out  for  himself  a  compre- 
hensive scheme  of  reform.  He  put  it  before  the  world 


84  A  UISTOEY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

early  in  1837.  The  public  were  taken  by  surprise  when 
the  plan  came  before  them  in  the  shape  of  a  pamphlet, 
which  its  author  modestly  entitled  "  Post-office  Reform ; 
its  importance  and  practicability."  The  root  of  Mr.  Hill's 
system  lay  in  the  fact,  made  evident  by  him  beyond  dis- 
pute, that  the  actual  cost  of  the  conveyance  of  letters 
through  the  post  was  very  trifling,  and  was  but  little 
increased  by  the  distance  over  which  they  had  to  be  car- 
ried. 

His  proposal  was,  therefore,  f,hat  the  rates  of  postage 
should  be  diminished  to  the  minimum  ;  that  at  the  same 
time  the  speed  of  conveyance  should  be  increased,  and 
that  there  should  be  much  greater  frequency  of  despatch. 
His  principle,  was,  in  fact,  the  very  opposite  of  that 
which  had  prevailed  in  the  calculations  of  the  authorities. 
Their  idea  was  that  the  higher  the  charge  for  letters  the 
greater  the  return  to  the  revenue.  He  started  on  the 
assumption  that  the  smaller  the  charge  the  greater  the 
profit.  He,  therefore,  recommended  the  substitution  of 
one  uniform  charge  of  one  penny  the  half-ounce,  with- 
out reference  to  the  distance  within  the  limits  of  the 
United  Kingdom  which  the  letter  had  to  be  carried.  The 
Post-office  authorities  were  at  first  uncompromising  in 
their  opposition  to  the  scheme.  The  Postmaster-general, 
Lord  Lichfield,  said  in  the  House  of  Lords,  that  of  all  the 
wild  and  extravagant  schemes  he  had  ever  heard  of,  it 
was  the  wildest  and  most  extravagant.  "  The  mails,"  he 
said,  "  will  have  to  carry  twelve  times  as  much  weight, 
and  therefore  the  charge  for  transmission,  instead  of 
£100,000,  as  now,  must  be  twelve  times  that  amount.  The 
walls  of  the  Post-office  would  burst ;  the  whole  area  in 
which  the  building  stands  would  not  be  large  enough  to 
receive  the  clerks  and  the  letters."  It  is  impossible  not 
to  be  struck  by  the  paradoxical  peculiarity  of  this  argu- 
ment. Because  the  change  would  be  so  much  welcomed 


SCIENCE  AND  SPEED.  85 

by  the  public,  Lord  Lichfleld  argued  that  it  ought  not  to 
be  made.  He  did  not  fall  back  upon  the  then  familiar 
assertion  that  the  public  would  not  send  anything  like 
the  number  of  letters  the  advocates  of  the  scheme  expected. 
He  argued  that  they  would  send  so  many  as  to  make  it 
troublesome  for  the  Post-office  authorities  to  deal  with 
them.  In  plain  words,  it  would  be  such  an  immense  ac- 
commodation to  the  population  in  general  that  the  officials 
could  not  undertake  the  trouble  of  carrying  it  into  effect. 
Another  Post-office  official,  Colonel  Maberley,  was,  at  all 
events,  more  liberal.  "  My  constant  language,"  he  said 
afterward,  "  to  the  heads  of  the  departments  was — This 
plan  we  know  will  fail.  It  is  our  duty  to  take  care  that 
no  obstruction  is  placed  in  the  way  of  it  by  the  heads  of 
the  departments,  and  by  the  Post-office.  The  allegation, 
I  have  not  the  least  doubt,  will  be  made  at  a  subsequent 
period,  that  this  plan  has  failed  in  consequence  of  the  un- 
willingness of  the  Government  to  carry  it  into  fair  execu- 
tion. It  is  our  duty,  as  servants  of  the  Government,  to 
take  care  that  no  blame  eventually  shall  fall  on  the  Gov- 
ernment through  any  unwillingness  of  ours  to  carry  it 
into  proper  effect."  It  is,  perhaps,  less  surprising  that 
the  routine  mind  of  officials  should  have  seen  no  future 
but  failure  for  the  scheme,  when  so  vigorous  and  untram- 
melled a  thinker  as  Sydney  Smith  spoke  with  anger  and 
contempt  of  the  fact  that  "  a  million  of  revenue  is  given 
up  in  the  nonsensical  Penny-post  scheme,  to  please  my 
old,  excellent,  and  universally  dissentient  friend,  Noah 
Warburton."  Mr.  Warburton  was  then  member  for 
Bridport,  and,  with  Mr.  Wallace,  another  member  of 
Parliament,  was  very  active  in  supporting  and  promoting 
the  views  of  Mr.  Hill.  "  I  admire  the  Whig  Ministry," 
Sydney  Smith  went  on  to  say,  "and  think  they  have 
done  more  good  things  than  all  the  ministries  since 
the  Revolution;  but  these  concessions  are  sad  and  un- 


80  A  IlISTOliY  OF  OUlt  OWN  TIMES. 

worthy  marks  of  weakness,  and  fill  reasonable  men  with 
alarm.'* 

It  will  be  seen  from  this  remark  alone  that  the  ministry 
had  yielded  somewhat  more  readily  than  might  have  been 
expected  to  the  arguments  of  Mr.  Hill.  At  the  time  his 
pamphlet  appeared  a  commission  was  actually  engaged 
in  inquiring  into  the  condition  of  the  Post-office  depart- 
ment. Their  attention  was  drawn  to  Mr.  Hill's  plan,  and 
they  gave  it  a  careful  consideration,  and  reported  in  its 
favor,  although  the  Post-office  authorities  were  convinced 
that  it  must  involve  an  unbearable  loss  of  revenue.  In 
Parliament  Mr.  Wallace,  whose  name  has  been  already 
mentioned,  moved  for  a  committee  to  inquire  into  the 
whole  subject,  and  especially  to  examine  the  mode  recom- 
mended for  charging  and  collecting  postage  in  the  pam- 
phlet of  Mr.  Hill.  The  committee  gave  the  subject  a  very 
patient  consideration,  and  at  length  made  a  report  recom- 
mending uniform  charges  and  prepayment  by  stamps. 
That  part  of  Mr.  Hill's  plan  which  suggested  the  use  of 
postage-stamps  was  adopted  by  him  on  the  advice  of  Mr. 
Charles  Knight.  The  Government  took  up  the  scheme 
with  some  spirit  and  liberality.  The  revenue  that  year 
showed  a  deficiency,  but  they  determined  to  run  the 
further  risk  which  the  proposal  involved.  The  commer- 
cial community  had  naturally  been  stirred  greatly  by  the 
project  which  promised  so  much  relief  and  advantage. 
Sydney  Smith  was  very  much  mistaken,  indeed,  when  he 
fancied  that  it  was  only  to  please  his  old  and  excellent 
friend,  Mr.  Warburton,  that  the  ministry  gave  way  to  the 
innovation.  Petitions  from  all  the  commercial  commu- 
nities were  pouring  in  to  support  the  plan,  and  to  ask 
that  at  least  it  should  have  a  fair  trial.  The  Government 
at  length  determined  to  bring  in  a  bill  which  should  pro- 
vide for  the  almost  immediate  introduction  of  Mr.  Hill's 
scheme,  and  for  the  abolition  of  the  franking  system  ex- 


SCIENCE  AND  SPEED.  87 

cept  in  the  case  of  official  letters  actually  sent  on  business 
directly  belonging  to  her  Majesty's  service.  The  bill 
declared,  as  an  introductory  step,  that  the  charge  for  post- 
age should  be  at  the  rate  of  fourpence  for  each  letter 
under  half  an  ounce  in  weight,  irrespective  of  distance, 
within  the  limits  of  the  United  Kingdom.  This,  however, 
was  to  be  only  a  beginning;  for  on  January  10th,  1840, 
the  postage  was  fixed  at  the  uniform  rate  of  one  penny 
per  letter  of  not  more  than  half  an  ounce  in  weight.  The 
introductory  measure  was  not,  of  course,  carried  without 
opposition  in  both  Houses  of  Parliament.  The  Duke  of 
"Wellington,  in  his  characteristic  way,  declared  that  he 
strongly  objected  to  the  scheme ;  but,  as  the  Government 
had  evidently  set  their  hearts  upon  it,  he  recommended 
the  House  of  Lords  not  to  offer  any  opposition  to  it.  In 
the  House  of  Commons  it  was  opposed  by  Sir  Robert  Peel 
and  Mr.  Goulburn,  both  of  whom  strongly  condemned 
the  whole  scheme  as  likely  to  involve  the  country  in  vast 
loss  of  revenue.  The  measure,  however,  passed  into  law. 
Some  idea  of  the  effect  it  has  produced  upon  the  postal 
correspondence  of  the  country  may  be  gathered  from  the 
fact  that  in  1839,  the  last  year  of  the  heavy  postage,  the 
number  of  letters  delivered  in  Great  Britain  and  Ireland 
was  a  little  more  than  eighty-two  millions,  which  included 
some  five  millions  and  a  half  of  franked  letters  returning 
nothing  to  the  revenues  of  the  country ;  whereas,  in  1875, 
more  than  a  thousand  millions  of  letters  were  delivered  in 
the  United  Kingdom.  The  population  during  the  same 
time  has  not  nearly  doubled  itself.  It  has  already  been 
remarked  that  the  principle  of  Sir  Rowland  Hill's  reform 
has  since  been  put  into  operation  in  every  civilized  coun- 
try in  the  world.  It  may  be  added  that  before  long  we 
shall,  in  all  human  probability,  see  an  interoceanic  post- 
age established  at  a  rate  as  low  as  people  sometimes 
thought  Sir  Rowland  Hill  a  madman  for  recommending 


88  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

as  applicable  to  our  inland  post.  The  time  is  not  far  dis- 
tant when  a  letter  will  be  carried  from  London  to  San 
Francisco,  or  to  Tokio  in  Japan,  at  a  rate  of  charge  as 
small  as  that  which  made  financiers  stare  and  laugh 
when  it  was  suggested  as  profitable  remuneration  for 
carrying  a  letter  from  London  to  the  towns  of  Sussex  or 
Hertfordshire.  The  "  Penny-post,"  let  it  be  said,  is  an 
older  institution  than  that  which  Sir  Rowland  Hill  intro- 
duced. A  penny-post  for  the  conveyance  of  letters  had 
been  set  up  in  London  so  long  ago  as  1683 ;  and  it  was 
adopted  or  annexed  by  the  Government  some  years  after. 
An  effort  was  even  made  to  set  up  a  half-penny  post  in 
London,  in  opposition  to  the  official  penny-post,  in  1708 ; 
but  the  Government  soon  crushed  this  vexatious  and  in- 
trusive rival.  In  1738  Dr.  Johnson  writes  to  Mr.  Cave 
"  to  entreat  that  you  will  be  pleased  to  inform  me,  by  the 
penny-post,  whether  you  resolve  to  print  the  poem." 
After  awhile  the  Government  changed  their  penny-post 
to  a  twopfenny-post,  and  gradually  made  a  distinction 
between  district  and  other  postal  systems,  and  contrived 
to  swell  the  price  for  deliveries  of  all  kinds.  Long  before 
even  this  time  of  the  penny-post,  the  old  records  of  the 
city  of  Bristol  contain  an  account  of  the  payment  of  one 
penny  for  the  carriage  of  letters  to  London.  It  need 
hardly  be  explained,  however,  that  a  penny  in  that  time, 
or  even  in  1683,  was  a  payment  of  very  different  value 
indeed  from  the  modest  sum  which  Sir  Rowland  Hill  was 
successful  in  establishing.  The  ancient  penny-post 
resembled  the  modern  penny-post  only  in  name. 


CHAETISM.  89 


CHAPTER  V. 

CHARTISM. 

IT  cannot,  however,  be  said  that  all  the  omens  under 
which  the  new  Queen's  reign  opened  at  home  were  as  auspi- 
cious as  the  coincidences  which  made  it  contemporary  with 
the  first  chapters  of  these  new  and  noble  developments  hi 
the  history  of  science  and  invention.  On  the  contrary,  it 
began  amidst  many  grim  and  unpromising  conditions  hi 
our  social  affairs.  The  winter  of  1837-38,  was  one  of 
unusual  severity  and  distress.  There  would  have  been 
much  discontent  and  grumbling  hi  any  case  among  the 
class  described  by  French  writers  as  the  proletaire  ;  but 
the  complaints  were  aggravated  by  a  common  belief  that 
the  young  Queen  was  wholly  under  the  influence  of  a 
frivolous  and  selfish  minister,  who  occupied  her  with 
amusements  while  the  poor  were  starving.  It  does  not 
appear  that  there  was  at  any  time  the  slightest  justifi- 
cation for  such  a  belief;  but  it  prevailed  among  the 
working-classes  and  the  poor  very  generally,  and  added  to 
the  sufferings  of  genuine  want  the  bitterness  of  imaginary 
wrong.  Popular  education  was  little  looked  after  ;  so  far 
as  the  state  was  concerned,  might  be  said  not  to  be  looked 
after  at  all.  The  laws  of  political  economy  were  as  yet 
only  within  the  appreciation  of  a  few,  who  were  regarded 
not  uncommonly,  because  of  their  theories,  somewhat  as 
phrenologists  or  mesmerists  might  be  looked  on  in  a  more 
enlightened  time.  Some  writers  have  made  a  great  deal 


90  A  UISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

of  the  case  of  Thorn  and  his  disciples  as  evidence  of  the 
extraordinary  ignorance  that  prevailed.  Thorn  was  a. 
broken-down  brewer,  and  in  fact  a  madman,  who  had  for 
some  time  been  going  about  in  Canterbury  and  other  parts 
of  Kent  bedizened  in  fantastic  costume,  and  styling  himself 
nt  first  Sir  William  Courtenay,  of  Powderham  Castle, 
Knight  of  Malta,  King  of  Jerusalem,  king  of  the  gypsy 
races,  and  we  know  not  what  else.  He  announced  himself 
as  a  great  political  reformer,  and  for  awhile  he  succeeded 
in  getting  many  to  believe  in  and  support  him.  He  was 
afterward  confined  for  some  time  in  a  lunatic  asylum,  and 
when  he  came  out  he  presented  himself  to  the  ignorant 
peasantry  in  the  character  of  a  second  Messiah.  He  found 
many  followers  and  believers  again,  among  a  humbler 
class,  indeed,  than  those  whom  he  had  formerly  won  over. 
Much  of  his  influence  over  the  poor  Kentish  laborers  was 
due  to  his  denunciations  of  the  new  Poor  Law,  which  was 
then  popularly  hated  and  feared  with  an  almost  insane 
intensity  of  feeling.  Thorn  told  them  he  had  come  to 
regenerate  the  whole  world,  and  also  to  save  his  followers 
from  the  new  Poor  Law;  and  the  latter  announcement 
commended  the  former.  He  assembled  a  crowd  of  his 
supporters,  and  undertook  to  lead  them  to  an  attack 
on  Canterbury.  With  his  own  hand  he  shot  dead  a 
policeman  who  endeavored  to  oppose  his  movements, 
exactly  as  a  savior  of  society  of  bolder  pretensions  and 
greater  success  did  at  Boulogne  not  long  after.  Two  com- 
panies of  soldiers  came  out  from  Canterbury  to  disperse 
the  rioters.  The  officer  in  command  was  shot  dead  by 
Thorn.  Thorn's  followers  then  charged  the  unexpectmg 
soldiers  so  fiercely  that  for  a  moment  there  was  some 
confusion ;  but  the  second  company  fired  a  volley  which 
stretched  Thorn  and  several  of  his  adherents  lifeless  on 
the  field.  That  was  an  end  of  the  rising.  Several  of 
Thorn's  followers  were  afterward  tried  for  murder,  con- 


CIIARTISM.    .  91 

victed,  and  sentenced ;  but  some  pity  was  felt  for  their 
'  ignorance  and  their  delusion,  and  they  were  not  consigned 
to  death.  Long  after  the  fall  of  their  preposterous  hero 
and  saint,  many  of  Thorn's  disciples  believed  that  he  would 
return  from  the  grave  to  carry  out  the  promised  work  of 
his  mission.  All  this  was  lamentable,  but  could  hardly 
be  regarded  as  specially  characteristic  of  the  early  years 
of  the  present  reign.  The  Thorn  delusion  was  not  much 
more  absurd  than  the  Tichborne  mania  of  a  later  day. 
Down  to  our  own  time  there  are  men  and  women  among 
the  Social  Democrats  of  cultured  Germany  who  still  cherish 
the  hope  that  their  idol  Ferdinand  Lassalle  will  come  back 
from  the  dead  to  lead  and  guide  them. 

But  there  were  political  and  social  dangers  in  the  open- 
ing of  the  present  reign  more  serious  than  any  that  could 
have  been  conjured  up  by  a  crazy  man  in  a  fantastic  dress. 
There  were  delusions  having  deeper  roots  and  showing  a 
more  inviting  shelter  than  any  that  a  religious  fanatic  of 
the  vulgar  type  could  cause  to  spring  up  in  our  society. 

Only  a  few  weeks  after  the  coronation  of  the  Queen  a 
great  Radical  meeting  was  held  in  Birmingham.  A  mani- 
festo was  adopted  there  which  afterward  came  to  be  known 
as  the  Chartist  petition.  With  that  movement  Chartism 
began  to  be  one  of  the  most  disturbing  influences  of  the 
political  life  of  the  country.  It  is  a  movement  which,- 
although  its  influence  may  now  be  said  to  have  wholly 
passed  away,  well  deserves  to  have  its  history  fully 
written.  For  ten  years  it  agitated  England.  It  some- 
times seemed  to  threaten  an  actual  uprising  of  all  the 
proletaire  against  what  were  then  the  political  and  social 
institutions  of  the  country.  It  might  have  been  a  very 
serious  danger  if  the  state  had  been  involved  in  any 
external  difficulties.  It  was  backed  by  much  genuine 
enthusiasm,  passion,  and  intelligence.  It  appealed 
strongy  and  naturally  to  whatever  there  was  of  discontent 


92  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

among  the  working-classes.  It  afforded  a  most  acceptable 
and  convenient  means  by  which  ambitious  politicians  of 
the  self-seeking  order  could  raise  themselves  into  tem- 
porary importance.  Its  fierce  and  fitful  flame  went  out 
at  last  under  the  influence  of  the  clear,  strong,  and  steady 
light  of  political  reform  and  education.  The  one  great 
lesson  it  teaches  is,  that  political  agitation  lives  and  is 
formidable  only  by  virtue  of  what  is  reasonable  in  its 
demands.  Thousands  of  ignorant  and  miserable  men  all 
over  the  country  joined  the  Chartist  agitation  who  cared 
nothing  about  the  substantial  value  of  its  political  claims. 
They  were  poor,  they  were  overworked,  they  were  badly 
paid,  their  lives  were  altogether  wretched.  They  got  into 
their  heads  some  wild  idea  that  the  People's  Charter  would 
give  them  better  food  and  wages,  and  lighter  work  if  it 
were  obtained,  and  that  for  that  very  reason  the  aristocrats 
and  the  officials  would  not  grant  it.  No  political  con- 
cessions could  really  have  satisfied  these  men.  If  the 
Charter  had  been  granted  in  1838,  they  would  no  doubt 
have  been  as  dissatisfied  as  ever  hi  1839.  But  the  discon- 
tent of  these  poor  creatures  would  have  brought  with  it 
little  danger  to  the  state  if  it  had  not  become  part  of  the 
support  of  an  organization  which  could  show  some  sound 
and  good  reason  for  the  demands  it  made.  The  moment 
that  the  clear  and  practical  political  grievances  were  dealt 
with,  the  organization  melted  way.  Vague  discontent, 
however  natural  and  excusable  it  may  be,  is  only  formi- 
dable in  politics  when  it  helps  to  swell  the  strength  and 
the  numbers  of  a  crowd  which  calls  for  some  reform  that 
can  be  made  and  is  withheld.  One  of  the  vulgarest 
fallacies  of  state-craft  is  to  declare  that  it  is  of  no  use 
granting  the  reforms  which  would  satisfy  reasonable 
demands,  because  there  are  still  unreasonable  agitators 
whom  these  will  not  satisfy.  Get  the  reasonable  men  on 
your  side,  and  you  need  not  fear  the  unreasonable.  This 


CHARTISM.  93 

is  the  lesson  taught  to  statesmen  by  the  Chartist  agitation. 
A  funeral  oration  over  Chartism  was  pronounced  by 
Sir  John  Campbell,  then  Attorney-general,  afterward 
Lord  Chief-justice  Campbell,  at  a  public  dinner  at  Edin- 
burgh on  October  24th,  1839.  He  spoke  at  some  length 
and  with  much  complacency  of  Chartism  as  an  agitation 
which  had  passed  away.  Some  ten  days  afterwards  oc- 
curred the  most  formidable  outburst  of  Chartism  that  had 
been  known  up  to  that  time,  and  Chartism  continued  to 
be  an  active  and  a  disturbing  influence  in  England  for 
nearly  ten  years  after.  If  Sir  John  Campbell  had  told  his 
friends  and  constituents  at  the  Edinburgh  dinner  that  the 
influence  of  Chartism  was  just  about  to  make  itself  really 
felt,  he  would  have  shown  himself  a  somewhat  more  acute 
politician  than  we  now  understand  him  to  be.  Seldom 
has  a  public  man  setting  up  to  be  a  political  authority 
made  a  worse  hit  than  he  did  in  that  memorable  declara- 
tion. Campbell  was,  indeed,  only  a  clever,  shrewd  lawyer 
of  the  hard  and  narrow  class.  He  never  made  any  pre- 
tension to  statesmanship,  or  even  to  great  political  knowl- 
edge ;  and  his  unfortunate  blunder  might  be  passed  over 
without  notice  were  it  not  that  it  illustrates  fairly  enough 
the  manner  in  which  men  of  better  information  and  judg- 
ment than  he  were  at  that  time  in  the  habit  of  disposing 
of  all  inconvenient  political  problems.  The  Attorney- 
general  was  aware  that  there  had  been  a  few  riots  and  a 
few  arrests,  and  that  the  law  had  been  what  he  would  call 
vindicated ;  and  as  he  had  no  manner  of  sympathy  with 
the  motives  which  could  lead  men  to  distress  themselves 
and  their  friends  about  imaginary  charters,  he  assumed 
that  there  was  an  end  of  the  matter.  It  did  not  occur  to 
him  to  ask  himself  whether  there  might  not  be  some  un- 
derlying causes  to  explain,  if  not  to  excuse,  the  agitation 
that  just  then  began  to  disturb  the  country,  and  that  con- 
tinued to  disturb  it  for  so  many  years.  Even  if  he  had 


94  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

inquired  into  the  subject,  it  is  not  likely  that  he  would 
have  come  to  any  wiser  conclusion  about  it.  The  dramatic 
instinct,  if  we  may  be  allowed  to  call  it  so,  which  enables 
a  man  to  put  himself  for  the  moment  into  the  condition 
and  mood  of  men  entirely  unlike  himself  in  feeling  and 
conditions,  is  an  indispensable  element  of  real  statesman- 
ship ;  but  it  is  the  rarest  of  all  gifts  among  politicians  of 
the  second  order.  If  Sir  John  Campbell  had  turned  his 
attention  to  the  Chartist  question,  he  would  only  have 
found  that  a  number  of  men,  for  the  most  part  poor  and 
ignorant,  were  complaining  of  grievances  where  he  could 
not  for  himself  see  any  substantial  grievances  at  all. 
That  would  have  been  enough  for  him.  If  a  solid,  wealthy, 
and  rising  lawyer  could  not  see  any  cause  for  grumbling, 
he  would  have  made  up  his  mind  that  no  reasonable 
persons  worthy  the  consideration  of  sensible  legislators 
would  continue  to  grumble  after  they  had  been  told  by 
those  in  authority  that  it  was  their  business  to  keep  quiet. 
But  if  he  had,  on  the  other  hand,  looked  with  the  light  of 
sympathetic  intelligence,  of  that  dramatic  instinct  which 
has  just  been  mentioned,  at  the  condition  of  the  classes 
among  whom  Chartism  was  then  rife,  he  would  have  seen 
that  it  was  not  likely  the  agitation  could  be  put  down  by  a 
few  prosecutions  and  a  few  arrests,  and  the  censure  of  a  pros- 
perous Attorney-general.  He  would  have  seen  that  Char- 
tism was  not  a  cause  but  a  consequence.  The  intelligence 
of  a  very  ordinary  man  who  approached  the  question  in 
an  impartial  mood  might  have  seen  that  Chartism  was 
the  expression  of  a  vague  discontent  with  very  positive 
grievances  and  evils. 

We  have,  in  our  time,  outlived  the  days  of  political 
abstractions.  The  catchwords  which  thrilled  our  fore- 
fathers with  emotion  on  one  side  or  the  other  fall  with 
hardly  any  meaning  on  our  ears.  We  smile  at  such 
phrases  as  "  the  rights  of  man."  We  hardly  know  what 


CHARTISM.  95 

is  meant  by  talking  of  "  the  people "  as  the  words  were 
used  long  ago,  when  "  the  people "  was  understood  to 
mean  a  vast  mass  of  wronged  persons  who  had  no  repre- 
sentation, and  were  oppressed  by  privilege  and  the  aristo- 
cracy. We  seldom  talk  of  "  liberty ; "  any  one  venturing 
to  found  a  theory  or  even  a  declamation  on  some  supposed 
deprival  of  liberty  would  soon  find  himself  in  the  awk- 
ward position  of  being  called  on  to  give  a  scientific  defini- 
tion of  what  he  understood  liberty  to  be.  He  would  be  as 
much  puzzled  as  were  certain  English  working-men,  who, 
desiring  to  express  to  Mr.  John  Stuart  Mill  their  sym- 
pathy with  what  they  called  hi  the  slang  of  Continental 
democracy  "  the  Revolution,"  were  calmly  bidden  by  the 
great  Liberal  thinker  to  ask  themselves  what  they  meant 
by  "  the  Revolution,"  which  revolution,  what  revolution, 
and  why  they  sympathized  with  it.  But  perhaps  we  are 
all  a  little  too  apt  to  think  that  because  these  abstractions 
have  no  living  meaning  now  they  never  had  any  living 
meaning  at  all.  They  convey  no  manner  of  clear  idea  in 
England  now,  but  it  does  not  by  any  means  follow  that 
they  never  conveyed  any  such  idea.  The  phrase  which 
Mr.  Mill  so  properly  comdemned  when  he  found  it  in  the 
mouths  of  English  working-men  had  a  very  intelligible 
and  distinct  meaning  when  it  first  came  to  be  used  in 
France  and  throughout  the  Continent.  "  The  Revolu- 
tion "  expressed  a  clear  reality,  as  recognizable  by  the  in- 
telligence of  all  who  heard  it  as  the  name  of  Free-trade 
or  of  Ultramontanism  to  men  of  our  time.  "  The  Revolu- 
tion" was  the  principle  which  was  asserting  all  over 
Europe  the  overthrow  of  the  old  absolute  power  of  kings, 
and  it  described  it  just  as  well  as  any  word  could  do.  It  is 
meaningless  in  our  day,  for  the  very  reason  that  it  was 
full  of  meaning  then.  So  it  was  with  "  the  people  "  and 
"  the  rights  of  the  people,"  and  the  "  rights  of  labor,"  and 
all  the  other  grandiloquent  phrases  which  seem  to  us  so 


90  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

empty  and  so  meaningless  now.  They  are  empty  and 
meaningless  at  the  present  hour;  but  they  have  no 
application  now  chiefly  because  they  had  application  then. 
The  Reform  Bill  of  1832  had  been  necessarily,  and  per- 
haps naturally,  a  class  measure.  It  had  done  great  things 
for  the  constitutional  system  of  England.  It  had  averted 
a  revolution  which  without  some  such  concession  would 
probably  have  been  inevitable.  It  had  settled  forever  the 
question  which  was  so  fiercely  and  so  gravely  debated 
during  the  discussions  of  the  reform  years,  whether  the 
English  Constitution  is  or  is  not  based  upon  a  system  of 
popular  representation.  To  many  at  present  it  may  seem 
hardly  credible  that  sane  men  could  have  denied  the 
existence  of  the  representative  principle.  But  during  the 
debates  on  the  great  Reform  Bill  such  a  denial  was  the 
strong  point  of  many  of  the  leading  opponents  of  the 
measure,  including  the  Duke  of  "Wellington  himself.  The 
principle  of  the  Constitution,  it  was  soberly  argued,  is 
that  the  sovereign  invites  whatever  communities  or  inter- 
ests he  thinks  fit  to  send  in  persons  to  Parliament  to 
take  council  with  him  on  the  affairs  of  the  nation.  This 
idea  was  got  rid  of  by  the  Reform  Bill.  That  bill  abolished 
fifty-six  nomination  or  rotten  boroughs,  and  took  away 
half  the  representation  from  thirty  others ;  it  disposed 
of  the  seats  thus  obtained  by  giving  sixty-five  additional 
representatives  to  the  counties,  and  conferring  the  right 
of  returning  members  on  Manchester,  Leeds,  Birming- 
ham, and  some  thirty-nine  large  and  prosperous  towns 
which  had  previously  had  no  representation;  while,  as 
Lord  John  Russell  said  in  his  speech  when  he  introduced 
the  bill  in  March,  1831,  "a  ruined  mound"  sent  two 
representatives  to  Parliament ;  "  three  niches  in  a  stone 
wall"  sent  two  representatives  to  Parliament ;  "a  park 
where  no  houses  were  to  be  seen "  sent  two  representa- 
tives to  Parliament.  The  bill  introduced  a  £10  house- 


CHARTISM.  97 

hold  qualification  for  boroughs,  and  extended  the  county 
franchise  to  lease-holders  and  copy-holders.  But  it  left 
the  working-classes  almost  altogether  out  of  the  franchise. 
Not  merely  did  it  confer  no  political  emancipation  on 
them,  but  it  took  away  in  many  places  the  peculiar  fran- 
chises which  made  the  working-men  voters.  There  were 
communities — such,  for  example,  as  that  of  Preston,  in 
Lancashire — where  the  system  of  franchise  existing 
created  something  like  universal  suffrage.  All  this  was 
smoothed  away,  if  such  an  expression  may  be  used,  by  the 
Reform  Bill.  In  truth,  the  Reform  Bill  broke  down  the 
monopoly  which  the  aristocracy  and  landed  classes  had 
enjoyed,  and  admitted  the  middle  classes  to  a  share  of 
the  law-making  power.  The  representation  was  divided 
between  the  aristocracy  and  the  middle  class,  instead 
of  being,  as  before,  the  exclusive  possession  of  the 
former. 

The  working-class,  in  the  opinion  of  many  of  their  ablest 
and  most  influential  representatives,  were  not  merely  left 
out  but  shouldered  out.  This  was  all  the  more  exasperat- 
ing because  the  excitement  and  agitation  by  the  strength 
of  which  the  Reform  Bill  was  carried  in  the  teeth  of  so 
much  resistance  were  kept  up  by  the  working-men.  There 
was,  besides,  at  the  time  of  the  Reform  Bill,  a  very  high 
degree  of  what  may  be  called  the  temperature  of  the 
French  Revolution  still  heating  the  senses  and  influencing 
the  judgment  even  of  the  aristocratic  leaders  of  the  move- 
ment. What  Richter  calls  the  "  seed-grains  "  of  the  revo- 
lutionary doctrines  had  been  blown  abroad  so  widely  that 
they  rested  in  some  of  the  highest  as  well  as  in  most  of 
the  lowliest  places.  Some  of  the  Reform  leaders — Lord 
Durham,  for  instance — were  prepared  to  go  much  farther 
in  the  way  of  Radicalism  than  at  a  later  period  Mr. 
Cobden  or  Mr.  Bright  would  have  gone.  There  was  more 
than  once  a  sort  of  appeal  to  the  working-men  of  the  coun. 

7 


98  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

try  which,  however  differently  it  may  have  been  meant, 
certainly  sounded  in  their  ears  as  if  it  were  an  intimation 
that  in  the  event  of  the  bill  being  resisted  too  long  it 
might  be  necessary  to  try  what  the  strength  of  a  popular 
uprising  could  do.  Many  years  after,  in  the  defence  of 
the  Irish  state-prisoners  at  Clonmel,  the  counsel  who 
pleaded  their  cause  insisted  that  they  had  warrant  for 
their  conduct  in  certain  proceedings  which  were  in  prepara- 
tion during  the  Reform  agitation.  He  talked  with  un- 
disguised significance  of  the  teacher  being  in  the  ministry 
and  the  pupils  in  the  dock ;  and  quoted  Captain  Macheath 
to  the  effect  that  if  laws  were  made  equally  for  every 
degree,  there  might  even  then  be  rare  company  on  Tyburn 
tree.  It  is  not  necessary  to  attach  too  much  importance  to 
assertions  of  this  kind,  or  to  accept  them  as  sober  contribu- 
tions to  history ;  but  they  are  very  instructive  as  a  means 
of  enabling  us  to  understand  the  feeling  of  soreness  which 
remained  hi  the  minds  of  large  masses  of  the  population 
when,  after  the  passing  of  the  Reform  Bill,  they  found 
themselves  left  out  in  the  cold.  Rightly  or  wrongly,  they 
believed  that  their  strength  had  been  kept  in  reserve  or 
in  terrorem  to  secure  the  carrying  of  the  Reform  Bill,  and 
that  when  it  was  carried  they  were  immediately  thrown 
over  by  those  whom  they  had  thus  helped  to  pass  it. 
Therefore,  at  the  time  when  the  young  sovereign  ascended 
the  throne,  the  working-classes  in  all  the  large  towns  were 
in  a  state  of  profound  disappointment  and  discontent, 
almost,  indeed,  of  disaffection.  Chartism  was  beginning  to 
succeed  to  the  Reform  agitation.  The  leaders  who  had 
come  from  the  ranks  of  the  aristocracy  had  been  discarded 
or  had  withdrawn.  In  some  cases  they  had  withdrawn  in 
perfect  good  faith,  believing  sincerely  that  they  had  done 
the  work  which  they  undertook  to  do,  and  that  that  was 
all  the  country  required.  Men  drawn  more  immediately 
from  the  working-class  itself,  or  who  had  in  some  way 


CHARTISM.  99 

been  dropped  down  by  a  class  higher  in  the  social  scale, 
took  up  the  popular  leadership  now. 

Chartism  may  be  said  to  have  sprung  definitively  into 
existence  in  consequence  of  the  formal  declarations  of  the 
leaders  of  the  Liberal  party  in  Parliament  that  they  did 
not  intend  to  push  Reform  any  farther.  At  the  opening 
of  the  first  Parliament  of  Queen  Victoria's  reign  the 
question  was  brought  to  a  test.  A  Radical  member  of 
the  House  of  Commons  moved  as  an  amendment  to  the 
address  a  resolution  declaring  in  favor  of  the  ballot  and  of 
shorter  duration  of  Parliaments.  Only  twenty  members 
voted  for  it ;  and  Lord  John  Russell  declared  distinctly 
against  all  such  attempts  to  reopen  the  Reform  question. 
It  was  impossible  that  this  declaration  should  not  be  re- 
ceived with  disappointment  and  anger  by  great  masses  of 
the  people.  They  had  been  in  the  full  assurance  that  the 
Reform  Bill  itself  was  only  the  means  by  which  greater 
changes  were  to  be  brought  about.  Lord  John  Russell 
said  in  the  House  of  Commons  that  to  push  Reform  any 
farther  then  would  be  a  breach  of  faith  toward  those  who 
helped  him  to  carry  it.  A  great  many  outside  Parliament 
not  unnaturally  regarded  the  refusal  to  go  any  farther  as 
a  breach  of  faith  toward  them  on  the  part  of  the  Liberal 
leaders.  Lord  John  Russell  was  right  from  his  point  of 
view.  It  would  have  been  impossible  to  carry  the  Reform 
movement  any  farther  just  then.  In  a  country  like  ours, 
where  interests  are  so  nicely  balanced,  it  must  always 
happen  that  a  forward  movement  in  politics  is  followed 
by  a  certain  reaction.  The  parliamentary  leaders  in  Par- 
liament were  already  beginning  to  feel  the  influence  of  this 
law  of  our  political  growth.  It  would  have  been  hopeless 
to  attempt  to  get  the  upper  and  middle  classes  at  such  a 
time  to  consent  to  any  further  changes  of  considerable 
importance.  But  the  feeling  of  those  who  had  helped  so 
materially  to  bring  about  the  Reform  movement  was  at 


100  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

least  intelligible  when  they  found  that  its  effects  were  to 
stop  just  short  of  the  measures  which  alone  could  have 
any  direct  influence  on  their  political  position. 

A  conference  was  held  almost  immediately  between  a 
few  of  the  Liberal  members  of  Parliament  who  professed 
radical  opinions  and  some  of  the  leaders  of  the  working- 
men.  At  this  conference  the  programme,  or  what  was 
always  afterward  known  as  "  the  Charter,"  was  agreed 
upon  and  drawn  up.  The  name  of  "  Charter  "  appears  to 
have  been  given  to  it  for  the  first  time  by  O'Connell. 
"  There's  your  Charter,"  he  said  to  the  secretary  of  the 
Working-men's  Association  ;  "  agitate  for  it,  and  never  be 
content  with  anything  less."  It  is  a  great  thing  accom- 
plished in  political  agitation  to  have  found  a  telling  name. 
A  name  is  almost  as  important  for  a  new  agitation  as  for 
a  new  novel.  The  title  of  "  The  People's  Charter  "  would 
of  itself  have  launched  the  movement. 

Quietly  studied  now,  the  People's  Charter  does  not  seem 
a  very  formidable  document.  There  is  little  smell  of  gun- 
powder about  it.  Its  "  points,"  as  they  were  called,  were 
six.  Manhood  Suffrage  came  first.  It  was  then  called 
universal  suffrage,  but  it  only  meant  manhood  suffrage, 
for  the  promoters  of  the  movement  had  not  the  slightest 
idea  of  insisting  on  the  franchise  for  women.  The  second 
was  Annual  Parliaments.  Vote  by  Ballot  was  the  third. 
Abolition  of  the  Property  Qualification  (then  and  for 
many  years  after  required  for  the  election  of  a  member  to 
Parliament)  was  the  fourth.  The  Payment  of  Members 
was  the  fifth  ;  and  the  Division  of  the  Country  into  Equal 
Electoral  Districts,  the  sixth  of  the  famous  points.  Of 
these  proposals  some,  it  will  be  seen,  were  perfectly 
reasonable.  Not  one  was  so  absolutely  unreasonable  as  to 
be  outside  the  range  of  fair  and  quiet  discussion  among 
practical  politicians.  Three  of  the  points — half,  that  is 
to  say,  of  the  whole  number — have  already  been  made 


CHARTISM.  101 

part  of  our  constitutional  system.  The  existing  franchise 
may  be  virtually  regarded  as  manhood  suffrage.  We 
have  for  years  been  voting  by  means  of  a  written  paper 
dropped  in  a  ballot-box.  The  property  qualification  for 
members  of  Parliament  could  hardly  be  said  to  have  been 
abolished.  Such  a  word  seems  far  too  grand  and  dignified 
to  describe  the  fate  that  befell  it.  We  should  rather  say 
that  it  was  extinguished  by  its  own  absurdity  and  vicious- 
ness.  It  never  kept  out  of  Parliament  any  person  legally 
disqualified,  and  it  was  the  occasion  of  incessant  tricks 
and  devices  which  would  surely  have  been  counted  dis- 
reputable and  disgraceful  to  those  who  engaged  in  them, 
but  that  the  injustice  and  folly  of  the  system  generated  a 
sort  of  false  public  conscience  where  it  was  concerned, 
and  made  people  think  it  as  lawful  to  cheat  it,  as  at  one 
time  the  most  respectable  persons  in  private  life  thought 
it  allowable  to  cheat  the  revenue  and  wear  smuggled  lace 
or  drink  smuggled  brandy.  The  proposal  to  divide  the 
country  into  equal  electoral  districts  is  one  which  can 
hardly  yet  be  regarded  as  having  come  to  any  test.  But 
it  is  almost  certain  that  sooner  or  later  some  alteration  of 
our  present  system  in  that  direction  will  be  adopted.  Of 
the  two  other  points  of  the  Charter,  the  payment  of  mem- 
bers may  be  regarded  as  decidedly  objectionable ;  and  that 
for  yearly  parliaments  as  embodying  a  proposition  which 
would  make  public  life  an  almost  insufferable  nuisance  to 
those  actively  concerned  in  it.  But  neither  of  these  two 
proposals  would  be  looked  upon  in  our  time  as  outside  the 
range  of  legitimate  political  discussion.  Indeed,  the  dif- 
ficulty any  one  engaged  in  their  advocacy  would  find 
just  now  would  be  hi  getting  any  considerable  body  of 
listeners  to  take  the  slightest  interest  in  the  argument 
either  for  or  against  them. 

The  Chartists  might  be  roughly  divided  into  three 
classes — the  political  Chartists,  the  social  Chartists,  and 


102  ^  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

the  Chartists  of  vague  discontent,  who  joined  the  move- 
ment because  they  were  wretched  and  felt  angry.  The 
first  were  the  regular  political  agitators,  who  wanted  a 
wider  popular  representation ;  the  second  were  chiefly 
led  to  the  movement  by  their  hatred  of  the  "  bread-tax." 
These  two  classes  were  perfectly  clear  as  to  what  they 
wanted :  some  of  their  demands  were  just  and  reasonable ; 
none  of  them  were  without  the  sphere  of  rational  and 
peaceful  controversy.  The  disciples  of  mere  discontent 
naturally  swerved  alternately  to  the  side  of  those  leaders 
or  sections  who  talked  loudest  and  fiercest  against  the 
law-makers  and  the  constituted  authorities.  Chartism 
soon  split  itself  into  two  general  divisions — the  moral 
force,  and  the  physical  force  Chartism.  Nothing  can  be 
more  unjust  than  to  represent  the  leaders  and  promoters 
of  the  movement  as  mere  factious  and  self-seeking  dema- 
gogues. Some  of  them  were  men  of  great  ability  and  elo- 
quence ;  some  were  impassioned  young  poets  drawn  from 
the  class  whom  Kingsley  has  described  hi  his  "Alton 
Locke ; "  some  were  men  of  education ;  many  were  earnest 
and  devoted  fanatics ;  and  so  far  as  we  can  judge,  all,  or 
nearly  all,  were  sincere.  Even  the  man  who  did  the  move- 
ment most  harm,  and  who  made  himself  most  odious  to 
all  reasonable  outsiders,  the  once  famous,  now  forgotten, 
Feargus  O'Connor,  appears  to  have  been  sincere,  and  to 
have  personally  lost  more  than  he  gained  by  his  Chartism. 
Four  or  five  years  after  the  collapse  of  what  may  be  called 
the  active  Chartist  agitation,  a  huge,  white-headed,  vac- 
uous-eyed man  was  to  be  seen  of  mornings  wandering 
through  the  arcades  of  Covent  Garden  Market,  looking  at 
the  fruits  and  flowers,  occasionally  taking  up  a  flower, 
smelling  at  it,  and  putting  it  down,  with  a  smile  of 
infantile  satisfaction ;  a  man  who  might  have  reminded 
observers  of  Mr.  Dick  in  Dickens's  "  David  Copperfield ; " 
and  this  was  the  once  renowned,  once  dreaded  and  detested 


CHARTISM.  103 

Feargus  O'Connor.  For  some  time  before  his  death  his 
reason  had  wholly  deserted  him.  Men  did  not  know  at 
first  in  the  House  of  Commons  the  meaning  of  the  odd 
pranks  which  Feargus  was  beginning  to  play  there  to  the 
bewilderment  of  the  great  assembly.  At  last  it  was  seen 
that  the.  fallen  leader  of  Chartism  was  a  hopeless  madman. 
It  is  hardly  to  be  doubted  that  insanity  had  long  been 
growing  on  him,  and  that  some  at  least  of  his  political  follies 
and  extravagances  were  the  result  of  an  increasing  disorder 
of  the  brain.  In  his  day  he  had  been  the  very  model  for 
a  certain  class  of  demagogue.  He  was  of  commanding 
presence,  great  stature,  and  almost  gigantic  strength.  He 
had  education ;  he  had  mixed  in  good  society ;  he  belonged 
to  an  old  family,  and,  indeed,  boasted  his  descent  from  a 
line  of  Irish  kings,  not  without  some  ground  for  the  claim. 
He  had  been  a  man  of  some  fashion  at  one  time,  and  had 
led  a  life  of  wild  dissipation  in  his  early  years.  He  had 
a  kind  of  eloquence  which  told  with  immense  power  on  a 
mass  of  half-ignorant  hearers ;  and,  indeed,  men  who  had 
no  manner  of  liking  for  him  or  sympathy  with  his  doctrines 
have  declared  that  he  was  the  most  effective  mob  orator 
they  had  ever  heard.  He  was  ready,  if  needs  were,  to  fight 
his  way  single-handed  through  a  whole  mass  of  Tory 
opponents  at  a  contested  election.  Thomas  Cooper,  the 
venerable  poet  of  Chartism,  has  given  an  amusing  de- 
scription, in  his  autobiography,  of  Feargus  O'Connor,  who 
was  then  his  hero,  leaping  from  a  wagon  at  a  Nottingham 
election  into  the  midst  of  a  crowd  of  Tory  butchers,  and 
with  only  two  stout  Chartist  followers  fighting  his  way 
through  all  opposition,  "  flooring  the  butchers  like  nine- 
pins." "  Once,"  says  Mr.  Cooper,  "  the  Tory  lambs  fought 
off  all  who  surrounded  him  and  got  him  down,  and  my 
heart  quaked — for  I  thought  they  would  kill  him.  But 
in  a  very  few  moments  his  red  head  emerged  again  from 


104  A  UISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

the  rough  human  billows,  and  he  was  fighting  his  way  as 
before." 

There  were  many  men  in  the  movement  of  a  nobler 
moral  nature  than  poor,  huge,  wild  Feargus  O'Connor. 
There  were  men  like  Thomas  Cooper  himself,  devoted,  im- 
passioned, full  of  poetic  aspiration,  and  no  scant  measure 
of  poetic  inspiration  as  well.  Henry  Vincent  was  a  man 
of  unimpeachable  character  and  of  some  ability,  an  effec- 
tive popular  speaker,  who  has  since  maintained  in  a  very 
unpretending  way  a  considerable  reputation.  Ernest 
Jones  was  as  sincere  and  self-sacrificing  a  man  as  ever 
joined  a  sinking  cause.  He  had  proved  his  sincerity  more 
in  deed  than  word.  His  talents  only  fell  short  of  that 
height  which  might  claim  to  be  regarded  as  genius.  His 
education  was  that  of  a  scholar  and  a  gentleman.  Many 
men  of  education  and  ability  were  drawn  into  sympathy, 
if  not  into  actual  co-operation,  with  the  Chartists  by  a 
conviction  that  some  of  their  claims  were  well-founded, 
and  that  the  grievances  of  the  working-classes,  which  were 
terrible  to  contemplate,  were  such  as  a  Parliament  better 
representing  all  classes  would  be  able  to  remedy.  Some 
of  these  men  have  since  made  for  themselves  an  honorable 
name  hi  Parliament  and  out  of  it ;  some  of  them  have 
risen  to  high  political  position.  It  is  necessary  to  read 
such  a  book  as  Thomas  Cooper's  autobiography,  to  under- 
stand how  genuine  was  the  poetic  and  political  enthusiasm 
which  was  at  the  heart  of  the  Chartist  movement,  and  how 
bitter  was  the  suffering  which  drove  into  its  ranks  so  many 
thousands  of  stout  working-men  who,  in  a  country  like 
England,  might  well  have  expected  to  be  able  to  live  by 
the  hard  work  they  were  only  too  willing  to  do.  One 
must  read  the  Anti-Corn-law  rhymes  of  Ebenezer  Elliot  to 
understand  how  the  "bread-tax"  became  identified  in 
the  minds  of  the  very  best  of  the  working-class,  and  iden- 
tified justly,  with  the  system  of  political  and  economical 


CHARTISM.  105 

legislation  which  was  undoubtedly  kept  up,  although  not 
of  conscious  purpose,  for  the  benefit  of  a  class.  In  the 
minds  of  too  many,  the  British  Constitution  meant  hard 
work  and  half-starvation. 

A  whole  literature  of  Chartist  newspapers  sprang  up  to 
advocate  the  cause.  The  Northern  Star,  owned  and  con- 
ducted by  Feargus  O'Connor,  was  the  most  popular  and 
influential  of  them  ;  but  every  great  town  had  its  Chartist 
press.  Meetings  were  held  at  which  sometimes  very  vio- 
lent language  was  employed.  It  began  to  be  the  practice 
to  hold  torch-light  meetings  at  night,  and  many  men 
went  armed  to  these,  and  open  clamor  was  made  by  the 
wilder  of  the  Chartists  for  an  appeal  to  arms.  A  formi- 
dable riot  took  place  in  Birmingham,  where  the  authori- 
ties endeavored  to  put  down  a  Chartist  meeting.  Ebene- 
zer  Elliott  and  other  sensible  sympathizers  endeavored  to 
open  the  eyes  of  the  more  extreme  Chartists  to  the  folly 
of  all  schemes  for  measures  of  violence ;  but,  for  the  time, 
the  more  violent  a  speaker  was,  the  better  chance  he  had 
of  becoming  popular.  Efforts  were  made  at  times  to 
bring  about  a  compromise  with  the  middle-class  Liberals 
and  the  Anti-Corn-law  leaders  ;  but  all  such  attempts 
proved  failures.  The  Chartists  would  not  give  up  their 
Charter  :  many  of  them  would  not  renounce  the  hope  of 
seeing  it  carried  by  force.  The  Government  began  to 
prosecute  some  of  the  orators  and  leaders  of  the  Charter 
movement ;  and  some  of  these  were  convicted,  imprisoned, 
and  treated  with  great  severity.  Henry  Vincent's  im- 
prisonment at  Newport,  in  Wales,  was  the  occasion  of  an 
attempt  at  rescue  which  bore  a  very  close  resemblance 
indeed  to  a  scheme  of  organized  and  armed  rebellion. 

Newport  had  around  it  a  large  mining  population,  and 
the  miners  were  nearly  all  physical-force  Chartists.  It 
was  arranged  among  them  to  march  in  three  divisions  to 
a  certain  rendezvous,  and  when  they  had  formed  a  June- 


100  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

tion  there,  which  was  to  be  two  hours  after  midnight,  to 
march  into  Newport,  attack  the  jail,  and  effect  the  release 
of  Vincent  and  other  prisoners.  The  attempt  was  to  be 
under  the  chief  command  of  Mr.  Frost,  a  trader  of  New- 
port,  who  had  been  a  magistrate,  but  was  deprived  of  the 
commission  of  the  peace  for  violent  political  speeches — a 
man  of  respectable  character  and  conduct  up  to  that  time. 
This  was  on  November  4th,  1839.  There  was  some  mis- 
understanding and  delay,  as  almost  invariably  happens  in 
wuch  enterprises,  and  the  divisions  of  the  little  army  did 
not  effect  their  junction  in  time.  "When  they  entered 
Newport,  they  found  the  authoritiej  fully  prepared  to 
meet  them.  Frost  entered  the  town  at  the  head  of  one 
division  only,  another  following  him  at  some  interval. 
The  third  was  nowhere,  as  far  as  the  object  of  the  enter- 
prise was  concerned.  A  conflict  took  place  between  the 
rioters  and  the  soldiery  and  police,  and  the  rioters  were 
dispersed  with  a  loss  of  some  ten  killed  and  fifty  wounded. 
In  their  flight  they  encountered  some  of  the  other  divi- 
sions coming  up  to  the  enterprise  all  too  late.  Nothing 
was  more  remarkable  than  the  courage  shown  by  the 
mayor  of  Newport,  the  magistrate,  and  the  little  body  of 
soldiers.  The  mayor,  Mr.  Phillips,  received  two  gunshot 
wounds.  Frost  was  arrested  next  day  along  with  some 
of  his  colleagues.  They  were  tried  on  June  6th,  1840. 
The  charge  against  them  was  one  of  high-treason.  There 
did  really  appear  ground  enough  to  suppose  that  the 
expedition  led  by  Frost  was  not  merely  to  rescue  Vincent, 
but  to  set  going  the  great  rebellious  movement  of  which 
the  physical-force  Chartists  had  long  been  talking.  The 
Chartists  appear  at  first  to  have  numbered  some  ten 
thousand — twenty  thousand,  indeed,  according  to  other 
accounts — and  they  were  armed  with  guns,  pikes,  swords, 
pickaxes,  and  bludgeons.  If  the  delay  and  misunder- 
standing had  not  taken  place,  and  they  had  arrived  at 


CHARTISM.  107 

their  rendezvous  at  the  appointed  time,  the  attempt  might 
have  led  to  very  calamitous  results.  The  jury  found 
Frost  and  two  of  his  companions,  Williams  and  Jones, 
guilty  of  high-treason,  and  they  were  sentenced  to  death  ; 
the  sentence,  however,  was  commuted  to  one  of  transpor- 
tation for  life.  Even  this  was  afterward  relaxed,  and 
when  some  years  had  passed  away,  and  Chartism  had 
ceased  to  be  a  disturbing  influence,  Frost  was  allowed  to 
return  to  England,  where  he  found  that  a  new  generation 
had  grown  up,  and  that  he  was  all  but  forgotten.  In  the 
mean  time  the  Corn-law  agitation  had  been  successful ; 
the  year  of  revolutions  had  passed  harmlessly  over ;  Fear- 
gus  O'Connor's  day  was  done. 

But  the  trial  and  conviction  of  Frost,  Williams,  and 
Jones  did  not  put  a  stop  to  the  Chartist  agitation.  On 
the  contrary,  that  agitation  seemed  rather  to  wax  and 
strengthen  and  grow  broader  because  of  the  attempt  at 
Newport  and  its  consequences.  Thomas  Cooper,  for 
example,  had  never  attended  a  Chartist  meeting,  nor  known 
anything  of  Chartism  beyond  what  he  read  in  the  news- 
papers, until  after  the  conviction  of  Frost  and  his  com- 
panions. There  was  no  lack  of  what  were  called  energetic 
measures  on  the  part  of  the  Government.  The  leading 
Chartists  all  over  the  country  were  prosecuted  and  tried, 
literally  by  hundreds.  In  most  cases  they  were  convicted 
and  sentenced  to  terms  of  imprisonment.  The  imprison- 
ment served  rather  to  make  the  Chartist  leaders  popular, 
and  to  advertise  the  movement,  than  to  accomplish  any 
purpose  the  Government  had  at  heart.  They  helped  to 
make  the  Government  very  unpopular.  The  working- 
classes  grew  more  and  more  bitter  against  the  Whigs, 
who,  they  said,  had  professed  Liberalism  only  to  gain  their 
own  ends,  and  were  really  at  heart  less  Liberal  than  the 
Tories.  Now  and  then  an  imprisoned  representative  of 
the  Chartist  movement  got  to  the  end  of  his  period  of 


108  ^  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

sentence,  and  came  out  of  durance.  He  was  a  hero  all 
over  again,  and  his  return  to  public  life  was  the  signal  for 
fresh  demonstrations  of  Chartism.  At  the  general  elec- 
tion of  1841,  the  vast  majority  of  the  Chartists,  acting  on 
the  advice  of  some  of  their  more  extreme  leaders,  threw 
all  their  support  into  the  cause  of  the  Tories,  and  so  helped 
the  downfall  of  the  Melbourne  Administration. 

Wide  and  almost  universal  discontent  among  the  work- 
ing-classes in  town  and  country  still  helped  to  swell  the 
Chartist  ranks.  The  weavers  and  stockingers  in  some  of 
the  manufacturing  towns  were  miserably  poor.  Wages 
were  low  everywhere.  In  the  agricultural  districts  the 
complaints  against  the  operation  of  the  new  Poor  Law 
were  vehement  and  passionate ;  and  although  they  were 
unjust  in  principle  and  sustained  by  monstrous  exaggera- 
tions of  statement,  they  were  not  the  less  potent  as  recruit- 
ing agents  for  Chartism.  There  was  a  profound  distrust 
of  the  middle  class  and  their  leaders.  The  Anti-Corn-law 
agitation  which  was  then  springing  up,  and  which,  one 
might  have  thought,  must  find  its  most  strenuous  support 
among  the  poor  artisans  of  the  towns,  was  regarded  with 
deep  disgust  by  some  of  the  Chartists,  and  with  down- 
right hostility  by  others.  A  very  temperate  orator  of  the 
Chartists  put  the  feeling  of  himself  and  his  fellows  hi  clear 
terms.  "We  do  not  object  to  the  repeal  of  the  Com 
Laws,"  he  said ;  "  on  the  contrary,  when  we  get  the  Char- 
ter we  will  repeal  the  Corn  Laws  and  all  the  bad  laws. 
But  if  you  give  up  your  agitation  for  the  Charter  to  help 
the  Free-traders,  they  will  never  help  you  to  get  the  Char- 
ter. Don't  be  deceived  by  the  middle  classes  again  ! 
You  helped  them  to  get  the  Reform  Bill,  and  where  are 
the  fine  promises  they  made  you  ?  Don't  listen  to  their 
humbug  any  more.  Stick  to  your  Charter.  Without 
your  votes  you  are  veritable  slaves."  The  Chartists 
believed  themselves  abandoned  by  their  natural  leaders. 


CHARTISM.  109 

All  manner  of  socialist  doctrines  began  to  creep  in  among 
them.  Wild  and  infidel  opinions  were  proclaimed  by 
many.  Thomas  Cooper  tells  one  little  anecdote  which  he 
says  fairly  illustrates  the  feelings  of  many  of  the  fiercer 
spirits  among  the  artisan  Chartists  in  some  of  the  towns. 
He  and  his  friends  were  holding  a  meeting  one  day  in 
Leicester.  A  poor  religious  stockinger  said  :  "  Let  us  be 
patient  a  little  longer ;  surely  God  Almighty  will  help  us 
soon."  "  Talk  to  us  no  more  about  thy  Goddle  Mighty," 
was  the  fierce  cry  that  came,  in  reply,  from  one  of  the 
audience ;  "  there  isn't  one !  If  there  was  one,  he  wouldn't 
let  us  suffer  as  we  do ! "  About  the  same  time  a  poor 
stockinger  rushed  into  Cooper's  house,  and  throwing  him- 
self wildly  on  a  chair,  exclaimed : "  I  wish  they  would  hang 
me !  I  have  lived  on  cold  potatoes  that  were  given  me 
these  two  days,  and  this  morning  I've  eaten  a  raw  potato 
for  sheer  hunger.  Give  me  a  bit  of  bread  and  a  cup  of 
coffee,  or  I  shall  drop !  "  Thomas  Cooper's  remark  about 
this  time  is  very  intelligible  and  simple.  It  tells  a  long, 
clear  story  about  Chartism.  "  How  fierce,"  he  says,  "  my 
discourses  became  now  in  the  Market-place  on  Sunday 
evenings  !  My  heart  often  burned  with  indignation  I  knew 
not  how  to  express.  I  began,  from  sheer  sympathy,  to  feel 
a  tendency  to  glide  into  the  depraved  thinking  of  some  of 
the  stronger  but  coarser  spirits  among  the  men." 

So  the  agitation  went  on.  We  need  not  follow  it 
through  all  its  incidents.  It  took  in  some  places  the  form 
of  industrial  strikes ;  in  others  of  socialistic  assemblages. 
Its  fanaticism  had  in  many  instances  a  strong  flavor  of 
nobleness  and  virtue.  Some  men  under  the  influence  of 
thoughtful  leaders  pledged  themselves  to  total  abstinence 
from  intoxicating  drinks,  in  the  full  belief  that  the  agita- 
tion would  never  succeed  until  the  working-classes  had 
proved  themselves,  by  their  self-control,  to  be  worthy  of 
the  gift  of  freedom.  In  other  instances,  as  has  been 


110  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

already  remarked,  the  disappointment  and  despair  of  the 
people  took  the  form  of  infidelity.  There  were  many  riots 
and  disturbances  ;  none,  indeed,  of  so  seemingly  rebellious 
a  nature  as  that  of  Frost  and  his  companions,  but  many 
serious  enough  to  spread  great  alarm,  and  to  furnish  fresh 
occasion  for  Government  prosecutions  and  imprisonments. 
Some  of  the  prisoners  seem  to  have  been  really  treated 
with  a  positively  wanton  harshness  and  even  cruelty. 
Thomas  Cooper's  account  of  his  own  sufferings  in  prison 
is  painful  to  read.  It  is  not  easy  to  understand  what 
good  purpose  any  Government  could  have  supposed  the 
prison  authorities  were  serving  by  the  unnecessary 
degradation  and  privation  of  men  who,  whatever  their 
errors,  were  conspicuously  and  transparently  sincere  and 
honest. 

It  is  clear  that  at  that  time  the  Chartists,  who  repre- 
sented the  bulk  of  the  artisan  class  in  most  of  the  large 
towns,  did  in  their  very  hearts  believe  that  England  was 
ruled  for  the  benefit  of  aristocrats  and  millionaires  who 
were  absolutely  indifferent  to  the  sufferings  of  the  poor. 
It  is  equally  clear  that  most  of  what  are  called  the  ruling 
class  did  really  believe  the  English  working-men  who 
joined  the  Chartist  movement  to  be  a  race  of  fierce, 
unmanageable,  and  selfish  communists  who,  if  they  were 
allowed  their  own  way  for  a  moment,  would  prove  them- 
selves determined  to  overthrow  throne,  altar,  and  all 
established  securities  of  society.  An  ignorant  panic  pre- 
vailed on  both  sides.  England  was  indeed  divided  then, 
as  Mr.  Disraeli's  novel  described  it,  into  two  nations,  the 
rich  and  the  poor,  hi  towns  at  least ;  and  each  hated  and 
feared  the  other  with  all  that  unthinking  hate  and  fear 
which  hostile  nations  are  capable  of  showing  even  amidst 
all  the  influences  of  civilization. 


QUESTION  DE  JUPONS.  Ill 


CHAPTER  VI. 

QUESTION"   DE    JUPOXS. 

MEANWHILE  things  were  looking  ill  with  the  Melbourne 
Ministry.  Sir  Robert  Peel  was  addressing  great  meetings 
of  his  followers,  and  declaring  with  much  show  of  justice 
that  he  had  created  anew  the  Conservative  party.  The 
position  of  the  Whigs  would  in  any  case  have  been  diffi- 
cult. Their  mandate,  to  use  the  French  phrase,  seemed 
to  be  exhausted.  They  had  no  new  thing  to  propose. 
They  came  into  power  as  reformers,  and  now  they  had 
nothing  to  offer  in  the  way  of  reform.  It  may  be  taken 
as  a  certainty  that  in  English  politics  reaction  must 
always  follow  advance.  The  Whigs  must  just  then  have 
come  in  for  the  effects  of  reaction.  But  they  had  more 
than  that  to  contend  with.  In  our  own  time,  Mr.  Glad- 
stone had  no  sooner  passed  his  great  measures  of  reform 
than  he  began  to  experience  the  effects  of  reaction.  But 
there  was  a  great  difference  between  his  situation  and 
that  of  the  Whigs  under  Melbourne.  He  had  not  failed  to 
satisfy  the  demands  of  his  followers.  He  had  no  extreme 
wing  of  his  party  clamoring  against  him  on  the  ground 
that  he  had  made  use  of  their  strength  to  help  him  in 
carrying  out  as  much  of  his  programme  as  suited  his  own 
coterie,  and  that  he  had  then  deserted  them.  This  was 
the  condition  of  the  Whigs.  The  more  advanced  Liberals 
and  the  whole  body  of  the  Chartists,  and  the  working- 
classes  generally,  detested  and  denounced  them.  Many 


112  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

of  the  Liberals  had  had  some  hope  while  Lord  Durham 
still  seemed  likely  to  be  a  political  power,  but  with  the 
fading  of  his  influence  they  lost  all  interest  in  the  Whig 
Ministry.  On  the  other  hand,  the  support  of  O'Connell 
was  a  serious  disadvantage  to  Melbourne  and  his  party 
in  England. 

But  the  Whig  ministers  were  always  adding  by  some 
mistake  or  other  to  the  difficulties  of  their  position.  The 
Jamaica  Bill  put  them  in  great  perplexity.  This  was  a 
measure  brought  in  on  April  9th,  1839,  to  make  temporary 
provision  for  the  government  of  the  island  of  Jamaica,  by 
setting  aside  the  House  of  Assembly  for  five  years,  and 
during  that  time  empowering  the  governor  and  council 
with  three  salaried  commissioners  to  manage  the  affairs 
of  the  colony.  In  other  words,  the  Melbourne  Ministry  pro- 
posed to  suspend  for  five  years  the  constitution  of  Jamaica. 
No  body  of  persons  can  be  more  awkwardly  placed  than  a 
Whig  Ministry  proposing  to  set  aside  a  constitutional  gov- 
ernment anywhere.  Such  a  proposal  may  be  a  necessary 
measure ;  it  may  be  unavoidable ;  but  it  always  comes 
with  a  bad  grace  from  Whigs  or  Liberals,  and  gives  their 
enemies  a  handle  against  them  which  they  cannot  fail  to 
use  to  some  purpose.  What,  indeed,  it  may  be  plausibly 
asked,  is  the  raison  d'etre  of  a  Liberal  Government,  if 
they  have  to  return  to  the  old  Tory  policy  of  suspended 
constitutions  and  absolute  law?  WhenRabagas,  become 
minister,  tells  his  master  that  the  only  way  to  silence 
discontent  is  by  the  literal  use  of  the  cannon,  the  Prince 
of  Monaco  remarks  very  naturally  that  if  that  was  to  be 
the  policy,  he  might  as  well  have  kept  to  his  old  ministers 
and  his  absolutism.  So  it  is  with  an  English  Liberal 
Ministry  advising  the  suspension  of  constitutions. 

In  the  case  of  the  Jamaica  Bill  there  was  some  excuse 
for  the  harsh  policy.  After  the  abolition  of  slavery,  the 
former  masters  in  the  island  found  it  very  hard  to  reconcile 


QUESTION  DE  JUPONS.  113 

themselves  to  the  new  condition  of  things.  They  could 
not  all  at  once  understand  that  their  former  slaves  were 
to  be  their  equals  before  the  law.  As  we  have  seen  much 
more  lately  in  the  Southern  States  of  America,  after  the  civil 
war  and  the  emancipation  of  the  negroes,  there  was  still  a 
pertinacious  attempt  made  by  the  planter  class  to  regain 
in  substance  the  power  they  had  had  to  renounce  in  name. 
This  was  not  to  be  justified  or  excused  ;  but,  as  human 
nature  is  made,  it  was  not  unnatural.  On  the  other  hand, 
some  of  the  Jamaica  negroes  were  too  ignorant  to  under- 
stand that  they  had  acquired  any  rights ;  others  were  a 
little  too  clamorous  in  their  assertion.  Many  a  planter 
worked  his  men  and  whipped  his  women  just  as  before  the 
emancipation,  and  the  victims  did  not  understand  that 
they  had  any  right  to  complain.  Many  negroes,  again, 
were  ignorantly  and  thoughtlessly  "  bumptious,"  to  use  a 
vulgar  expression,  in  the  assertion  of  their  newly-found 
equality.  The  imperial  governors  and  officials  were  gen- 
erally and  justly  eager  to  protect  the  negroes ;  and  the 
result  was  a  constant  quarrel  between  the  Jamaica  House 
of  Assembly  and  the  representatives  of  the  home  Govern- 
ment. The  Assembly  became  more  insolent  and  offensive 
every  day.  A  bill,  very  necessary  in  itself,  was  passed  by 
the  Imperial  Parliament  for  the  better  regulation  of  prisons 
in  Jamaica,  and  the  House  of  Assembly  refused  to  submit  to 
any  such  legislation.  Under  these  circumstances,  the  Mel- 
bourne Ministry  proposed  the  suspension  of  the  constitu- 
tion of  the  island.  The  measure  was  opposed  not  only  by 
Peel  and  the  Conservatives,  but  by  many  Radicals.  It 
was  argued  that  there  were  many  courses  open  to  the 
ministry  short  of  the  high-handed  proceeding  they  pro- 
posed ;  and,  in  truth,  there  was  not  that  confidence  in  the 
Melbourne  Ministry  at  all  which  would  have  enabled 
them  to  obtain  from  Parliament  a  majority  sufficient  to 
carry  through  such  a  policy.  The  ministry  was  weak  and 

8 


114  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

discredited ;  anybody  might  now  throw  a  stone  at  it.  They 
only  had  a  majority  of  five  in  favor  of  their  measure. 
This,  of  course,  was  a  virtual  defeat.  The  ministry  acknowl- 
edged it,  and  resigned.  Their  defeat  was  a  humiliation ; 
their  resignation  an  inevitable  submission ;  but  they  came 
back  to  office  almost  immediately  under  conditions  that 
made  the  humiliation  more  humbling,  and  rendered  their 
subsequent  career  more  difficult  by  far  than  their  past 
struggle  for  existence  had  been. 

The  return  of  the  Whigs  to  office — for  they  cannot  be 
said  to  have  returned  to  power — came  about  in  a  very  odd 
way.  Gulliver  ought  to  have  had  an  opportunity  of  telling 
such  a  story  to  the  king  of  the  Brobdingnagians,  in  order 
the  better  to  impress  him  with  a  clear  idea  of  the  logical 
beauty  of  constitutional  government.  It  was  an  entirely 
new  illustration  of  the  old  cherchezlafemme  principle,  the 
femme  in  this  case,  however,  being  altogether  a  passive 
and  innocent  cause  of  trouble.  The  famous  controversy 
known  as  the  "  Bedchamber  Question  "  made  a  way  back 
for  the  Whigs  into  place.  When  Lord  Melbourne  resigned, 
the  Queen  sent  for  the  Duke  of  Wellington,  who  advised 
her  to  apply  to  Sir  Robert  Peel,  for  the  reason  that  the 
chief  difficulties  of  a  Conservative  Government  would  be 
in  the  House  of  Commons.  The  Queen  sent  for  Peel,  and 
when  he  came,  told  him,  with  a  simple  and  girlish  frank- 
ness, that  she  was  sorry  to  have  to  part  with  her  late 
ministers,  of  whose  conduct  she  entirely  approved,  but  that 
she  bowed  to  constitutional  usage.  This  must  have  been 
rather  an  astonishing  beginning  to  the  grave  and  formal 
Peel ;  but  he  was  not  a  man  to  think  any  worse  of  the 
candid  young  sovereign  for  her  outspoken  ways.  The 
negotiations  went  on  very  smoothly  as  to  the  colleagues 
Peel  meant  to  recommend  to  her  Majesty,  until  he  hap- 
pened to  notice  the  composition  of  the  royal  household 
as  regarded  the  ladies  most  closely  in  attendance  on  the 


QUESTION  DE  JUPONS.  115 

Queen.  For  example,  he  found  that  the  wife  of  Lord 
Normanby  and  the  sister  of  Lord  Morpeth  were  the  two 
ladies  in  closest  attendance  on  her  Majesty.  Now  it  has 
to  be  borne  in  mind — it  was  proclaimed  again  and  again 
during  the  negotiations — that  the  chief  difficulty  of  the 
Conservatives  would  necessarily  be  in  Ireland,  where  their 
policy  would  be  altogether  opposed  to  that  of  the  Whigs. 
Lord  Normanby  had  been  Lord-lieutenant  of  Ireland  under 
the  Whigs,  and  Lord  Morpeth,  whom  we  can  all  remem- 
ber as  the  amiable  and  accomplished  Lord  Carlisle  of  later 
time,  Irish  Secretary.  It  certainly  could  not  be  satis- 
factory for  Peel  to  try  to  work  a  new  Irish  policy  while 
the  closest  household  companions  of  the  Queen  were  the 
wife  and  sister  of  the  displaced  statesmen  who  directly 
represented  the  policy  he  had  to  supersede.  Had  this 
point  of  view  been  made  clear  to  the  sovereign  at  first,  it 
is  hardly  possible  that  any  serious  difficulty  could  have 
arisen.  The  Queen  must  have  seen  the  obvious  reason- 
ableness of  Peel's  request ;  nor  is  it  to  be  supposed  that 
the  two  ladies  in  question  could  have  desired  to  hold  their 
places  under  such  circumstances.  But  unluckily  some 
misunderstanding  took  place  at  the  very  beginning  of  the 
conversations  on  this  point.  Peel  only  desired  to  press 
for  the  retirement  of  the  ladies  holding  the  higher  offices ; 
he  did  not  intend  to  ask  for  any  change  affecting  a  place 
lower  in  official  rank  than  that  of  lady  of  the  bedchamber. 
But  somehow  or  other  he  conveyed  to  the  mind  of  the 
Queen  a  different  idea.  She  thought  he  meant  to  insist, 
as  a  matter  of  principle,  upon  the  removal  of  all  her  famil- 
iar attendants  and  household  associates.  Under  this  im- 
pression she  consulted  Lord  John  Russell,  who  advised 
her  on  what  he  understood  to  be  the  state  of  the  facts. 
On  his  advice,  the  Queen  stated  in  reply  that  she  could 
not  "  consent  to  a  course  which  she  conceives  to  be  con- 
trary to  usage  and  is  repugnant  to  her  feelings."  Sir 


116  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

Robert  Peel  held  firm  to  his  stipulation ;  and  the  chance 
of  his  then  forming  a  ministry  was  at  an  end.  Lord  Mel- 
bourne and  his  colleagues  had  to  be  recalled ;  and  at  a 
cabinet  meeting  they  adopted  a  minute  declaring  it  rea- 
sonable "  that  the  great  offices  of  the  Court  and  situations 
in  the  household  held  by  members  of  Parliament  should 
be  included  in  the  political  arrangements  made  on,  change 
in  the  Administration ;  but  they  are  not  of  opinion  that  a 
similar  principle  should  be  applied  or  extended  to  the 
offices  held  by  ladies  in  her  Majesty's  household." 

The  matter  was  naturally  made  the  subject  of  explana- 
tion in  both  Houses  of  Parliament.  Sir  Robert  Peel  was 
undoubtedly  right  in  his  view  of  the  question,  and  if  he 
had  been  clearly  understood  the  right  could  hardly  have 
been  disputed;  but  he  defended  his  position  in  language 
of  what  now  seems  rather  ludicrous  exaggeration.  He 
treated  this  question  de  jupons  as  if  it  were  of  the  last 
importance  not  alone  to  the  honor  of  the  ministry,  but  even 
to  the  safety  of  the  realm.  "  I  ask  you,"  he  said,  "  to  go 
back  to  other  times  :  take  Pitt  or  Fox,  or  any  other  min- 
ister of  this  proud  country,  and  answer  for  yourselves  the 
question,  is  it  fitting  that  one  man  shall  be  the  minister, 
responsible  for  the  most  arduous  charge  that  can  fall  to 
the  lot  of  man,  and  that  the  wife  of  the  other — that  other 
his  most  formidable  political  enemy — shall,  with  his  ex- 
press consent,  hold  office  in  immediate  attendance  on  the 
sovereign? "  " Oh,  no !  "  he  exclaimed,  in  an  outburst  of 
indignant  eloquence.  "  I  felt  that  it  was  impossible  ;  I 
could  not  consent  to  this.  Feelings  more  powerful  than 
reasoning  told  me  that  it  was  not  for  my  own  honor  or 
for  the  public  interests  that  I  should  consent  to  be  min- 
ister of  England."  This  high-flown  language  seems  oddly 
out  of  place  on  the  lips  of  a  statesman  who,  of  all  his  con- 
temporaries, was  the  least  apt  to  indulge  in  bursts  of  over- 
wrought sentiment.  Lord  Melbourne,  on  the  other  hand, 


QUESTION  DE  JUPONS  117 

defended  his  action  in  the  House  of  Lords  in  language  of 
equal  exaggeration.  "  I  resume  office,"  he  said,  "  unequiv- 
ocally and  solely  for  this  reason,  that  I  will  not  desert 
my  sovereign  in  a  situation  of  difficulty  and  distress,  es- 
pecially when  a  demand  is  made  upon  her  Majesty  with 
which  I  think  she  ought  not  to  comply — a  demand  incon- 
sistent with  her  personal  honor,  and  which,  if  acquiesced 
in,  would  render  her  reign  liable  to  all  the  changes  and 
variations  of  political  parties,  and  make  her  domestic  life 
one  constant  scene  of  unhappiness  and  discomfort." 

In  the  country  the  incident  created  great  excitement. 
Some  Liberals  bluntly  insisted  that  it  was  not  right  in 
such  a  matter  to  consult  the  feelings  of  the  sovereign  at 
all,  and  that  the  advice  of  the  minister,  and  his  idea  of 
what  was  for  the  good  of  the  country,  ought  alone  to  be 
considered.  On  the  other  hand,  O'Connell  burst  into 
impassioned  language  of  praise  and  delight,  as  he  dwelt 
upon  the  decision  of  the  Queen,  and  called  upon  the 
Power  above  to  bless  "  the  young  creature — that  creat- 
ure of  only  nineteen,  as  pure  as  she  is  exalted,"  who  con- 
sulted not  her  head,  but  "  the  overflowing  feelings  of  her 
young  heart."  "  Those  excellent  women  who  had  been 
so  long  attached  to  her,  who  had  nursed  and  tended  to 
her  wants  in  her  childhood,  who  had  watched  over  her  in 
her  sickness,  whose  eyes  beamed  with  delight  as  they 
saw  her  increasing  daily  in  beauty  and  in  loveliness — 
when  they  were  threatened  to  be  forced  away  from  her — 
her  heart  told  her  that  she  could  as  well  part  with  that 
heart  itself  as  with  those  whom  it  held  so  dear."  Fear- 
gus  O'Connor  went  a  good  deal  farther,  however,  when 
he  boldly  declared  that  he  had  excellent  authority  for  the 
statement  that  if  the  Tories  had  got  the  young  Queen 
into  their  hands  by  the  agency  of  the  new  ladies  of  the 
bedchamber,  they  had  a  plan  for  putting  her  out  of  the 
way  and  placing  "  the  bloody  Cumberland  "  on  the  throne 


118  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

in  her  stead.  In  O'Connell's  case,  no  mystery  was  made 
of  the  fact  that  he  believed  the  ladies  actually  surround- 
ing the  young  Queen  to  be  friendly  to  what  he  considered 
the  cause  of  Ireland ;  and  that  he  was  satisfied  Peel  and 
the  Tories  were  against  it.  For  the  wild  talk  represented 
by  the  words  of  Feargus  O'Connor,  it  is  only  necessary 
to  say  that,  frenzied  and  foolish  as  it  must  seem  now  to 
us,  and  as  it  must  even  then  have  seemed  to  all  rational 
beings,  it  had  the  firm  acceptance  of  large  masses  of 
people  throughout  the  country,  who  persisted  in  seeing  in 
Peel's  pleadings  for  the  change  of  the  bedchamber  women 
the  positive  evidence  of  an  unscrupulous  Tory  plot  to  get 
possession  of  the  Queen's  person,  not  indeed  for  the 
purpose  of  violently  altering  the  succession,  but  in  the 
hope  of  poisoning  her  mind  against  all  Liberal  opinions. 
Lord  Brougham  was  not  likely  to  lose  so  good  an 
opportunity  of  attacking  Lord  Melbourne  and  his  col- 
leagues. He  insisted  that  Lord  Melbourne  had  sacrificed 
Liberal  principles  and  the  interest  of  the  country  to  the 
private  feelings  of  the  sovereign.  "I  thought,"  he  de- 
clared, in  a  burst  of  eloquent  passion,  "  that  we  belonged 
to  a  country  hi  which  the  government  by  the  Crown  and 
the  wisdom  of  Parliament  was  everything,  and  the  per- 
sonal feelings  of  the  sovereign  were  absolutely  not  to  be 
named  at  the  same  time.  ...  I  little  thought  to  have 
lived  to  hear  it  said  by  the  Whigs  of  1839,  'Let  us  rally 
round  the  Queen ;  never  mind  the  House  of  Commons ; 
never  mind  measures  ;  throw  principles  to  the  dogs ; 
leave  pledges  unredeemed ;  but  for  God's  sake  rally  round 
the  throne.'  Little  did  I  think  the  day  would  come  when 
I  should  hear  such  language,  not  from  the  unconstitu- 
tional, place-hunting,  king-loving  Tories,  who  thought  the 
public  was  made  for  the  king,  not  the  king  for  the  public, 
but  from  the  Whigs  themselves  !  The  Jamaica  Bill,  said 
to  be  a  most  important  measure,  had  been  brought  for- 


QUESTION  DE  JUPONS.  119 

ward.  The  Government  staked  their  existence  upon  it. 
They  were  not  able  to  carry  it ;  they  therefore  conceived 
they  had  lost  the  confidence  of  the  House  of  Commons. 
They  thought  it  a  measure  of  paramount  necessity  then. 
Is  it  less  necessary  now  ?  Oh,  but  that  is  altered !  The 
Jamaica  question  is  to  be  new-fashioned ;  principles  are 
to  be  given  up,  and  all  because  of  two  ladies  of  the  bed- 
chamber." 

Nothing  could  be  more  undesirable  than  the  position  in 
which  Lord  Melbourne  and  his  colleagues  had  allowed  the 
sovereign  to  place  herself.  The  more  people  in  general 
came  to  think  over  the  matter,  the  more  clearly  it  was 
seen  that  Peel  was  in  the  right,  although  he  had  not  made 
himself  understood  at  first,  and  had,  perhaps,  not  shown 
all  through  enough  of  consideration  for  the  novelty  of  the 
young  sovereign's  position,  or  for  the  difficulty  of  finding 
a  conclusive  precedent  on  such  a  question,  seeing  that 
since  the  principle  of  ministerial  responsibility  had  come  to 
be  recognized  among  us  in  its  genuine  sense,  there  never 
before  had  been  a  woman  on  the  throne.  But  no  one  could 
deliberately  maintain  the  position  at  first  taken  up  by  the 
Whigs  ;  and,  in  point  of  fact,  they  were  soon  glad  to  drop 
it  as  quickly  and  quietly  as  possible.  The  whole  ques- 
tion, it  may  be  said  at  once,  was  afterward  settled  by  a 
sensible  compromise  which  the  Prince  Consort  suggested. 
It  was  agreed  that  on  a  change  of  ministry  the  Queen 
would  listen  to  any  representation  from  the  incoming 
Prime-minister  as  to  the  composition  of  her  household, 
and  would  arrange  for  the  retirement,  "  of  their  own 
accord,"  of  any  ladies  who  were  so  closely  related  to  the 
leaders  of  Opposition  as  to  render  their  presence  inconve- 
nient. The  Whigs  came  back  to  office  utterly  discredited. 
They  had  to  tinker  up  somehow  a  new  Jamaica  Bill.  They 
had  declared  that  they  could  not  remain  in  office  unless 
they  were  allowed  to  deal  in  a  certain  way  with  Jamaica ; 


120  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TINES. 

and  now  that  they  were  back  again  in  office,  they  could 
not  avoid  trying  to  do  something  with  the  Jamaica  busi- 
ness. They,  therefore,  introduced  a  new  bill,  which  was 
a  mere  compromise  put  together  in  the  hope  of  its  being 
allowed  to  pass.  It  was  allowed  to  pass,  after  a  fashion ; 
that  is,  when  the  Opposition  in  the  House  of  Lords  had 
tinkered  it  and  amended  it  at  their  pleasure.  The  bed- 
chamber question,  in  fact,  had  thrown  Jamaica  out  of  per- 
spective. The  unfortunate  island  must  do  the  best  it 
could  now ;  in  this  country,  statesmen  had  graver  matter 
to  think  of.  Sir  Robert  Peel  could  not  govern  with  Lady 
Normanby  ;  the  Whigs  would  not  govern  without  her. 

It  does  not  seem  by  any  means  clear,  however,  that 
Lord  Melbourne  and  his  colleagues  deserved  the  savage 
censure  of  Lord  Brougham  merely  for  having  returned  to 
office  and  given  up  their  original  position  with  regard  to 
the  Jamaica  Bill.  "What  else  remained  to  be  done  ?  If 
they  had  refused  to  come  back,  the  only  result  would  have 
been  that  Peel  must  have  become  Prime-minister,  with  a 
distinct  minority  in  the  House  of  Commons.  Peel  could 
not  have  held  his  ground  there,  except  by  the  favor  and 
mercy  of  his  opponents ;  and  those  were  not  merciful 
days  in  politics.  He  would  only  have  taken  office  to  be 
called  upon  at  once  to  resign  it  by  some  adverse  vote  of 
the  House  of  Commons.  The  state  of  things  seems,  in 
this  respect,  to  be  not  unlike  that  which  existed  when  Mr. 
Gladstone  was  defeated  on  the  Irish  University  Bill  in  1873. 
Mr.  Gladstone  resigned,  or  rather  tendered  his  resigna- 
tion ;  and  by  his  advice  her  Majesty  invited  Mr.  Disraeli 
to  form  a  cabinet.  Mr.  Disraeli  did  not  see  his  way  to 
undertake  the  government  of  the  country  with  the  exist- 
ing House  of  Commons  ;  and  as  the  conditions  under 
which  he  was  willing  to  undertake  the  duty  were  not  con- 
veniently attainable,  the  negotiation  came  to  an  end.  The 
Queen  sent  again  for  Mr.  Gladstone,  who  consented  to  re- 


QUESTION  DE  JUPONS.  121 

sume  his  place  as  Prime-minister.  If  Lord  Melbourne  re- 
turned to  office  with  the  knowledge  that  he  could  not  carry 
the  Jamaica  Bill,  which  he  had  declared  to  be  necessary, 
Mr.  Gladstone  resumed  his  place  at  the  head  of  his  minis- 
try without  the  remotest  hope  of  being  able  to  carry  his 
Irish  University  measure.  No  one  ever  found  fault  with 
Mr.  Gladstone  for  having,  under  the  circumstances,  done 
the  best  he  could,  and  consented  to  meet  the  request  of 
the  sovereign  and  the  convenience  of  the  public  service  by 
again  taking  on  himself  the  responsibility  of  government, 
although  the  measure  on  which  he  had  declared  he  would 
stake  the  existence  of  his  ministry  had  been  rejected  by 
the  House  of  Commons. 

Still,  it  cannot  be  denied  that  the  Melbourne  Govern- 
ment were  prejudiced  in  the  public  mind  by  these  events, 
and  by  the  attacks  for  which  they  gave  so  large  an  oppor- 
tunity. The  feeling  in  some  part  of  the  country  were  still 
sentimentally  with  the  Queen.  At  many  a  dinner -table 
it  became  the  fashion  to  drink  the  health  of  her  Majesty 
with  a  punning  addition,  not  belonging  to  an  order  of  wit 
any  higher  than  that  which  in  other  days  toasted  the  King 
"  over  the  water ; "  or  prayed  of  heaven  to  "  send  this 
crumb  well  down."  The  Queen  was  toasted  as  the  sover- 
eign of  spirit  who  "  would  not  let  her  belles  be  peeled." 
But  the  ministry  were  almost  universally  believed  to  have 
placed  themselves  in  a  ridiculous  light,  and  to  have  crept 
again  into  office,  as  an  able  writer  puts  it,  "  behind  the 
petticoats  of  the  ladies  in  waiting."  The  death  of  Lady 
Flora  Hastings,  which  occurred  almost  immediately, 
tended  further  to  arouse  a  feeling  of  dislike  to  the  Whigs. 
This  melancholy  event  does  not  need  any  lengthened  com- 
ment. A  young  lady  who  belonged  to  the  household  of 
the  Duchess  of  Kent  fell  under  an  unfounded,  but,  in  the 
circumstances,  not  wholly  unreasonable,  suspicion.  It 
was  the  classic  story  of  Calisto,  Diana's  unhappy  nymph, 


122  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

reversed.  Lady  Flora  was  proved  to  be  innocent;  but 
her  death,  imminent  probably  in  any  case  from  the  dis- 
ease which  had  fastened  on  her,  was  doubtless  hastened 
by  the  humiliation  to  which  she  had  been  subjected.  It 
does  not  seem  that  any  one  was  to  blame  in  the  matter. 
The  ministry  certainly  do  not  appear  to  have  done  any- 
thing for  which  they  could  fairly  be  reproached.  No  one 
can  be  surprised  that  those  who  surrounded  the  Queen 
and  the  Duchess  of  Kent  should  have  taken  some  pains 
to  inquire  into  the  truth  or  falsehood  of  scandalous 
rumors,  for  which  there  might  have  appeared  to  be  some 
obvious  justification.  But  the  whole  story  was  so  sad 
and  shocking ;  the  death  of  the  poor  young  lady  followed 
with  such  tragic  rapidity  upon  the  establishment  of  her 
innocence  ;  the  natural  complaints  of  her  mother  were  so 
loud  and  impassioned,  that  the  ministers  who  had  to 
answer  the  mother's  appeals  were  unavoidably  placed  in 
an  invidious  and  a  painful  position.  The  demands  of  the 
Marchioness  of  Hastings  for  redress  were  unreasonable. 
They  endeavored  to  make  out  the  existence  of  a  cruel 
conspiracy  against  Lady  Flora,  and  called  for  the  peremp- 
tory dismissal  and  disgrace  of  the  eminent  court  physi- 
cian, who  had  merely  performed  a  most  painful  duty,  and 
whose  report  had  been  the  especial  means  of  establishing 
the  injustice  of  the  suspicions  which  were  directed  against 
her.  But  it  was  a  damaging  duty  for  a  minister  to  have 
to  write  to  the  distracted  mother,  as  Lord  Melbourne 
found  it  necessary  to  do,  telling  her  that  her  demand  was 
"  so  unprecedented  and  objectionable,  that  even  the  re- 
spect due  to  your  ladyship's  sex,  rank,  family,  and  char- 
acter would  not  justify  me  in  more,  if,  indeed,  it  author- 
izes so  much,  than  acknowledging  that  letter  for  the  sole 
purpose  of  acquainting  your  ladyship  that  I  have  received 
it."  The  "Palace  scandal,"  as  it  was  called,  became 
known  shortly  before  the  dispute  about  the  ladies  of  the 


QUESTION  DE  JUPONS.  123 

bedchamber.  The  death  of  Lady  Flora  Hastings  happened 
soon  after  it.  It  is  not  strictly  in  logical  propriety  that 
such  events,  or  their  rapid  succession,  should  tend  to 
bring  into  disrepute  the  ministry,  who  can  only  be  re- 
garded as  their  historical  contemporaries.  But  the  world 
must  change  a  great  deal  before  ministers  are  no  longer 
held  accountable  in  public  opinion  for  anything  but  the 
events  over  which  they  can  be  shown  to  have  some  con- 
trol. 


124  A  1IISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

THE  QUEEN'S  MARRIAGE. 

ON  January  16th,  1840,  the  Queen,  opening  Parliament 
in  person,  announced  her  intention  to  marry  her  cousin, 
Prince  Albert  of  Saxe-Coburg-Gotha — a  step  which  she 
trusted  would  be  "  conducive  to  the  interests  of  my  peo- 
ple as  well  as  to  my  own  domestic  happiness."  In  the 
discussion  which  followed  hi  the  House  of  Commons,  Sir 
Robert  Peel  observed  that  her  Majesty  had  "  the  singu- 
lar good  fortune  to  be  able  to  gratify  her  private  feelings, 
while  she  performs  her  public  duty,  and  to  obtain  the  best 
guarantee  for  happiness  by  contracting  an  alliance  founded 
on  affection."  Peel  spoke  the  simple  truth ;  it  was,  indeed, 
a  marriage  founded  on  affection.  No  marriage  contracted 
in  the  humblest  class  could  have  been  more  entirely  a 
union  of  love,  and  more  free  from  what  might  be  called 
selfish  and  worldly  considerations.  The  Queen  had  for  a 
long  time  loved  her  cousin.  He  was  nearly  her  own  age, 
the  Queen  being  the  elder  by  three  months  and  two  or 
three  days.  Francis  Charles  Augustus  Albert  Emmanuel 
was  the  full  name  of  the  young  Prince.  He  was  the 
second  son  of  Ernest,  Duke  of  Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld,  and 
of  his  wife  Louisa,  daughter  of  Augustus,  Duke  of  Saxe- 
Gotha-Altenberg.  Prince  Albert  was  born  at  the  Rosenau, 
one  of  his  father's  residences,  near  Coburg,  on  August 
26th,  1819.  The  court  historian  notices  with  pardonable 
complacency  the  "  remarkable  coincidence  " — easily  ex- 


PRINCE  ALBERT. 


THE  QUEERS  MAERIAGE.  125 

plained,  surely — that  the  same  accoucheuse,  Madame 
Siebold,  assisted  at  the  birth  of  Prince  Albert,  and  of  the 
Queen  some  three  months  before,  and  that  the  Prince  was 
baptized  by  the  clergyman,  Professor  Genzler,  who  had 
the  year  before  officiated  at  the  marriage  of  the  Duke  and 
Duchess  of  Kent.  A  marriage  between  the  Princess  Vic- 
toria and  Prince  Albert  had  been  thought  of  as  desirable 
among  the  families  on  both  sides,  but  it  was  always  wisely 
resolved  that  nothing  should  be  said  to  the  young  Princess 
on  the  subject  unless  she  herself  showed  a  distinct  liking 
for  her  cousin.  In  1836  Prince  Albert  was  brought  by 
his  father  to  England,  and  made  the  personal  acquaint- 
ance of  the  Princess,  and  she  seems  at  once  to  have  been 
drawn  toward  him  in  the  manner  which  her  family  and 
friends  would  most  have  desired.  Three  years  later  the 
Prince  again  came  to  England,  and  the  Queen,  in  a  letter 
to  her  uncle,  the  King  of  the  Belgians,  wrote  of  him 
in  the  warmest  terms.  "  Albert's  beauty,"  she  said,  "  is 
most  striking,  and  he  is  most  amiable  and  unaffected — in 
short,  very  fascinating."  Not  many  days  after  she  wrote 
to  another  friend  and  faithful  counsellor,  the  Baron 
Stockmar,  to  say,  "  I  do  feel  so  guilty  I  know  not  how  to 
begin  my  letter ;  but  I  think  the  news  it  will  contain  will 
be  sufficient  to  insure  your  forgiveness.  Albert  has  com- 
pletely won  my  heart,  and  all  was  settled  between  us  this 
morning."  The  Queen  had  just  before  informed  Lord 
Melbourne  of  her  intention,  and  Lord  Melbourne,  it  is 
needless  to  say,  expressed  his  decided  approval.  There 
was  no  one  to  disapprove  of  such  a  marriage. 

Prince  Albert  was  a  young  man  to  win  the  heart  of  any 
girl.  He  was  singularly  handsome,  graceful,  and  gifted. 
In  princes,  as  we  know,  a  small  measure  of  beauty  and 
accomplishment  suffices  to  throw  courtiers  and  court  ladies 
into  transports  of  admiration ;  but  had  Prince  Albert  been 
the  son  of  a  farmer  or  a  butler,  he  must  have  been  admired 


126  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

for  his  singular  personal  attractions.  He  had  had  a  sound 
and  a  varied  education.  He  had  been  brought  up  as  if  he 
were  to  be  a  professional  musician,  a  professional  chemist 
or  botanist,  and  a  professor  of  history  and  belles-lettres 
and  the  fine  arts.  The  scientific  and  the  literary  were 
remarkably  blended  in  his  bringing-up ;  remarkably,  that 
is  to  say,  for  some  half-century  ago,  when  even  in  Germany 
a  system  of  education  seldom  aimed  at  being  totus,  teres 
atque  rotundus.  He  had  begun  to  study  the  constitutional 
history  of  states,  and  was  preparing  himself  to  take  an 
interest  in  politics.  There  was  much  of  the  practical  and 
business-like  about  him,  as  he  showed  in  after-life ;  he 
loved  farming,  and  took  a  deep  interest  in  machinery  and 
hi  the  growth  of  industrial  science.  He  was  a  sort  of 
combination  of  the  troubadour,  the  savant,  and  the  man 
of  business.  His  tastes  were  for  a  quiet,  domestic,  and 
unostentatious  life — a  life  of  refined  culture,  of  happy, 
calm  evenings,  of  art  and  poetry,  and  genial  communion 
with  Nature.  He  was  made  happy  by  the  songs  of  birds, 
and  delighted  hi  sitting  alone  and  playing  the  organ.  But 
there  was  in  him,  too,  a  great  deal  of  the  political  philoso- 
pher. He  loved  to  hear  political  and  other  questions  well 
argued  out,  and  once  observed  that  a  false  argument  jarred 
on  his  nerves  as  much  as  a  false  note  in  music.  He  seems 
to  have  had  from  his  youth  an  all-pervading  sense  of  duty. 
So  far  as  we  can  guess,  he  was  almost  absolutely  free 
from  the  ordinary  follies,  not  to  say  sins,  of  youth. 
Young  as  he  was  when  he  married  the  queen,  he  devoted 
himself  at  once  to  what  he  conscientiously  believed  to  be 
the  duties  of  his  station  with  a  self-control  and  self-devotion 
rare  even  among  the  aged,  and  almost  unknown  in  youth. 
He  gave  up  every  habit,  however  familiar  and  dear,  every 
predilection,  no  matter  how  sweet,  every  indulgence  of 
sentiment  or  amusement  that  in  any  way  threatened  to 
interfere  with  the  steadfast  performance  of  the  part  he  had 


THE  Q  UEEW  S  NAREIA  GE.  127 

assigned  to  himself.  No  man  ever  devoted  himself  more 
faithfully  to  the  difficult  duties  of  a  high  and  a  new  situa- 
tion, or  kept  more  strictly  to  his  resolve.  It  was  no  task  to 
him  to  be  a  tender  husband  and  a  loving  father.  This 
was  apart  of  his  sweet,  pure,  and  affectionate  nature.  It 
may  well  be  doubted  whether  any  other  queen  ever  had  a 
married  life  so  happy  as  that  of  Queen  Victoria. 

The  marriage  of  the  Queen  and  the  Prince  took  place  on 
February  10th,  1840.  The  reception  given  by  the  people 
in  general  to  the  Prince  on  his  landing  in  England  a  few 
days  before  the  ceremony,  and  on  the  day  of  the  marriage, 
was  cordial,  and  even  enthusiastic.  But  it  is  not  certain 
whether  there  was  a  very  cordial  feeling  to  the  Prince 
among  all  classes  of  politicians.  A  rumor  of  the  most 
absurd  kind  had  got  abroad  in  certain  circles  that  the 
young  Albert  was  not  a  Protestant — that  he  was,  in  fact, 
a  member  of  the  Church  of  Rome.  In  a  different  circle 
the  belief  was  curiously  cherished  that  the  Prince  was  a 
free-thinker  in  matters  of  religion,  and  a  radical  in  poli- 
tics. Somewhat  unfortunately,  the  declaration  of  the 
intended  marriage  to  the  privy  council  did  not  mention 
the  fact  that  Albert  was  a  Protestant  Prince.  The  cabinet 
no  doubt  thought  that  the  leaders  of  public  opinion  on  all 
sides  of  politics  would  have  had  historical  knowledge 
among  them  to  teach  them  that  Prince  Albert  belonged  to 
that  branch  of  the  Saxon  family  which  since  the  Reforma- 
tion had  been  conspicuously  Protestant.  "  There  has  not," 
Prince  Albert  himself  wrote  to  the  Queen,  on  December 
7th,  1839,  "  been  a  single  Catholic  princess  introduced  into 
the  Coburg  family  since  the  appearance  of  Luther  in  1521. 
Moreover,  the  Elector  Frederick  the  Wise  of  Saxony  was 
the  very  first  Protestant  that  ever  lived."  No  doubt  the 
ministry  thought  also  that  the  constitutional  rule  which 
forbids  an  English  sovereign  to  marry  with  a  Roman 
Catholic  under  penalty  of  forfeiting  the  crown,  would  be 


128  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

regarded  as  a  sufficient  guarantee  that  when  they  announced 
the  Queen's  approaching  marriage  it  must  be  a  marriage 
with  a  Protestant.  All  this  assumption,  however  reason- 
able and  natural,  did  not  find  warrant  in  the  events  that 
actually  took  place.  It  would  have  been  better,  of  course, 
if  the  Government  had  assumed  that  Parliament  and  the 
public  generally  knew  nothing  about  the  Prince  and  his 
ancestry,  or  the  constitutional  penalties  for  a  member  of 
the  Royal  Family  marrying  a  Catholic,  and  had  formally 
announced  that  the  choice  of  Queen  Victoria  had  happily 
fallen  on  a  Protestant.  The  wise  and  foreseeing  Leopold, 
King  of  the  Belgians,  had  recommended  that  the  fact 
should  be  specifically  mentioned ;  but  it  was,  perhaps,  a 
part  of  Lord  Melbourne's  indolent  good-nature  to  take  it 
for  granted  that  people  generally  would  be  calm  and 
reasonable,  and  that  all  would  go  right  without  interruption 
or  cavil.  He  therefore  acted  on  the  assumption  that  any 
formal  mention  of  Prince  Albert's  Protestantism  would 
be  superfluous ;  and  neither  in  the  declaration  to  the  privy 
council  nor  hi  the  announcement  to  Parliament  was  a  word 
said  upon  the  subject.  The  result  was  that  in  the  debate  on 
the  address  in  the  House  of  Lords  a  somewhat  unseemly  al- 
tercation took  place,  an  altercation  the  more  to  be  regretted 
because  it  might  have  been  so  easily  spared.  The  question 
was  bluntly  raised  by  no  less  a  person  than  the  Duke  of 
"Wellington  whether  the  future  husband  of  the  Queen  was 
or  was  not  a  Protestant.  The  Duke  actually  charged  the 
ministry  with  having  purposely  left  out  the  word  "  Prot- 
estant "  in  the  announcements,  in  order  that  they  might 
not  offend  their  Irish  and  Catholic  supporters,  and  by  the 
very  charge  did  much  to  strengthen  the  popular  feeling 
against  the  statesmen  who  were  supposed  to  be  kept  in 
office  by  virtue  of  the  patronage  of  O'Connell.  The  Duke 
moved  that  the  word  "Protestant"  be  inserted  in  the 
congratulatory  address  to  the  Queen,  and  he  carried  his 


THE  QUEEN'S  MARRIAGE.  129 

point,  although  Lord  Melbourne  held  to  the  opinion  that 
the  word  was  unnecessary  in  describing  a  Prince  who  was 
not  only  a  Protestant,  but  descended  from  the  most  Prot- 
estant family  in  Europe.  The  lack  of  judgment  and  tact 
on  the  part  of  the  ministry  was  never  more  clearly  shown 
than  in  the  original  omission  of  the  word. 

Another  disagreeable  occurrence  was  the  discussion  that 
took  place  when  the  bill  for  the  naturalization  of  the  Prince 
was  brought  before  the  House  of  Lords.  The  bill  in  its 
title  merely  set  out  the  proposal  to  provide  for  the  natu- 
ralization of  the  Prince ;  but  it  contained  a  clause  to  give 
him  precedence  for  life  "next  after  her  Majesty,  hi  Parlia- 
ment or  elsewhere,  as  her  Majesty  might  think  proper." 
A  great  deal  of  objection  was  raised  by  the  Duke  of  Wel- 
lington and  Lord  Brougham  to  this  clause  on  its  own 
merits ;  but,  as  was  natural,  the  objections  were  infinitely 
aggravated  by  the  singular  want  of  judgment,  and  even 
of  common  propriety,  which  could  introduce  a  clause 
conferring  on  the  sovereign  powers  so  large  and  so  new 
into  a  mere  naturalization  bill,  without  any  previous 
notice  to  Parliament.  The  matter  was  ultimately  settled, 
by  allowing  the  bill  to  remain  a  simple  naturalization 
measure,  and  leaving  the  question  of  precedence  to  be 
dealt  with  by  Royal  prerogative.  Both  the  great  political 
parties  concurred,  without  further  difficulty,  in  an  ar- 
rangement by  which  it  was  provided  in  letters  patent 
that  the  Prince  should  thenceforth  upon  all  occasions,  and 
in  all  meetings,  except  when  otherwise  provided  by  Act 
of  Parliament,  have  precedence  next  to  the  Queen.  There 
never  would  have  been  any  difficulty  in  the  matter  if  the 
ministry  had  acted  with  any  discretion ;  but  it  would  be 
absurd  to  expect  that  a  great  nation,  whose  constitutional 
system  is  built  up  of  precedents,  should  agree  at  once  and 
without  demur  to  every  new  arrangement  which  it  might 
seem  convenient  to  a  ministry  to  make  in  a  hurry.  Yet 

9 


130  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

another  source  of  dissatisfaction  to  the  palace  and  the 
people  was  created  by  the  manner  in  which  the  ministry 
took  upon  themselves  to  bring  forward  the  proposition  for 
the  settlement  of  an  annuity  on  the  Prince.  In  former 
cases — that,  for  example,  of  Queen  Charlotte,  Queen  Ade- 
laide, and  Prince  Leopold  on  his  marriage  with  the  Prin- 
cess Charlotte — the  annuity  granted  had  been  £50,000. 
It  so  happened,  however,  that  the  settlement  to  be  made 
on  Prince  Albert  came  hi  times  of  great  industrial  and  com- 
mercial distress.  The  days  had  gone  by  when  economy  in 
the  House  of  Commons  was  looked  upon  as  an  ignoble  prin- 
ciple, and  when  loyalty  to  the  sovereign  was  believed  to 
bind  members  of  Parliament  to  grant,  without  a  murmur 
of  discussion,  any  sums  that  might  be  asked  by  the  minister 
in  the  sovereign's  name.  Parliament  was  beginning  to  feel 
more  thoroughly  its  responsibility  as  the  guardian  of  the 
nation's  resources,  and  it  was  no  longer  thought  a  fine 
thing  to  give  away  the  money  of  the  tax-payer  with  mag- 
nanimous indifference.  It  was,  therefore,  absurd  on  the 
part  of  the  ministry  to  suppose  that  because  great  sums 
of  money  had  been  voted  without  question  on  former  oc- 
casions, they  would  be  voted  without  question  now.  It  is 
quite  possible  that  the  whole  matter  might  have  been  set- 
tled without  controversy  if  the  ministry  had  shown  any 
judgment  whatever  in  their  conduct  of  the  business.  In 
our  day  the  ministry  would  at  once  have  consulted  the 
leaders  of  the  Opposition.  In  all  matters  where  the 
grant  of  money  to  any  one  connected  with  the  sovereign 
is  concerned,  it  is  now  understood  that  the  gift  shall  come 
with  the  full  concurrence  of  both  parties  in  Parliament. 
The  leader  of  the  House  of  Commons  would  probably,  by 
arrangement,  propose  the  grant,  and  the  leader  of  the 
Opposition  would  second  it.  In  the  case  of  the  annuity 
to  Prince  Albert,  the  ministry  had  the  almost  incredible 
folly  to  bring  forward  their  proposal  without  having 


THE  QUEENS  MARRIAGE.  131 

invited  in  any  way  the  concurrence  of  the  Opposition. 
They  introduced  the  proposal  without  discretion ;  they 
conducted  the  discussion  on  it  without  temper.  They 
answered  the  most  reasonable  objections  with  imputa- 
tions of  want  of  loyalty ;  and  they  gave  some  excuse  for 
the  suspicion  that  they  wished  to  provoke  the  Opposition 
into  some  expression  that  might  make  them  odious  to  the 
Queen  and  the  Prince.  Mr.  Hume,  the  economist,  pro- 
posed that  the  annuity  be  reduced  from  £50,000  to  £21,- 
000.  This  was  negatived.  Thereupon  Colonel  Sibthorp, 
a  once  famous  Tory  fanatic  of  the  most  eccentric  manners 
and  opinions,  proposed  that  the  sum  be  £30,000,  and  he 
received  the  support  of  Sir  Robert  Peel  and  other  eminent 
members  of  the  Opposition;  and  the  amendment  was 
carried. 

These  were  not  auspicious  incidents  to  prelude  the 
Royal  marriage.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  for  a  time 
the  Queen,  still  more  than  the  Prince,  felt  their  influence 
keenly.  The  Prince  showed  remarkable  good  sense  and 
appreciation  of  the  condition  of  political  arrangements  in 
England,  and  readily  comprehended  that  there  was  noth- 
ing personal  to  himself  in  any  objections  which  the  House 
of  Commons  might  have  made  to  the  proposals  of  the 
ministry.  The  question  of  precedence  was  very  easily 
settled  when  it  came  to  be  discussed  in  reasonable  fash- 
ion ;  although  it  was  not  until  many  years  after  (1857) 
that  the  title  of  Prince  Consort  was  given  to  the  husband 
of  the  Queen. 

A  few  months  after  the  marriage,  a  bill  was  passed 
providing  for  a  regency  in  the  possible  event  of  the  death 
of  the  Queen,  leaving  issue.  With  the  entire  concurrence 
of  the  leaders  of  the  Opposition,  who  were  consulted  this 
time,  Prince  Albert  was  named  Regent,  following  the  pre- 
cedent which  had  been  adopted  in  the  instance  of  the 
Princess  Charlotte  and  Prince  Leopold.  The  Duke  of 


132  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

Sussex,  uncle  of  the  Queen,  alone  dissented  in  the  House 
of  Lords,  and  recorded  his  protest  against  the  proposal. 
The  passing  of  this  bill  was  naturally  regarded  as  one  of 
much  importance  to  Prince  Albert.  It  gave  him  to  some 
extent  the  status  in  the  country  which  he  had  not  had 
before.  It  also  proved  that  the  Prince  himself  had  risen 
hi  the  estimation  of  the  Tory  party  during  the  few  months 
that  elapsed  since  the  debates  on  the  annuity  and 
the  question  of  precedence.  No  one  could  have  started 
with  a  more  resolute  determination  to  stand  clear  of  party 
politics  than  Prince  Albert.  He  accepted  at  once  his  posi- 
tion as  the  husband  of  the  Queen  of  a  constitutional  coun- 
try. His  own  idea  of  his  duty  was  that  he  should  be  the 
private  secretary  and  unofficial  counsellor  of  the  Queen. 
To  this  purpose  he  devoted  himself  unswervingly.  Out- 
side that  part  of  his  duties,  he  constituted  himself  a  sort  of 
minister  without  portfolio  of  art  and  education.  He  took 
an  interest,  and  often  a  leading  part,  in  all  projects  and 
movements  relating  to  the  spread  of  education,  the  cul- 
ture of  art,  and  the  promotion  of  industrial  science.  Yet 
it  was  long  before  he  was  thoroughly  understood  by  the 
country.  It  was  long  before  he  became  hi  any  degree 
popular ;  and  it  may  be  doubted  whether  he  ever  was 
thoroughly  and  generally  popular.  Not,  perhaps,  until 
his  untimely  death  did  the  country  find  out  how  entirely 
disinterested  and  faithful  his  life  had  been,  and  how  he 
had  made  the  discharge  of  duty  his  business  and  his  task. 
His  character  was  one  which  is  liable  to  be  regarded  by 
ordinary  observers  as  possessing  none  but  negative  vir- 
tues. He  was  thought  to  be  cold,  formal,  and  apathetic. 
His  manners  were  somewhat  shy  and  constrained,  except 
when  he  was  in  the  company  of  those  he  loved,  and  then 
he  commonly  relaxed  into  a  kind  of  boyish  freedom  and 
joyousness.  But  to  the  public  in  general  he  seemed 
formal  and  chilling.  It  is  not  only  Mr.  Pendennis  who 


THE  QUEEN'S  MAEEIAGE.  133 

conceals  his  gentleness  under  a  shy  and  pompous  de- 
meanor. With  all  his  ability,  his  anxiety  to  learn,  his 
capacity  for  patient  study,  and  his  willingness  to  welcome 
new  ideas,  he  never,  perhaps,  quite  understood  the  genius 
of  the  English  political  system.  His  faithful  friend  and 
counsellor,  Baron  Stockmar,  was  not  the  man  best  cal- 
culated to  set  him  right  on  this  subject.  Both  were  far 
too  eager  to  find  in  the  English  Constitution  a  piece  of 
symmetrical  mechanism,  or  to  treat  it  as  a  written  code 
from  which  one  might  take  extracts  or  construct  sum- 
maries for  constant  reference  and  guidance.  But  this 
was  not,  in  the  beginning,  the  cause  of  any  coldness 
toward  the  Prince  on  the  part  of  the  English  public. 
Prince  Albert  had  not  the  ways  of  an  Englishman ;  and 
the  tendency  of  Englishmen,  then  as  now,  was  to  assume 
that  to  have  manners  other  than  those  of  an  English- 
man was  to  be  so  far  unworthy  of  confidence.  He  was 
not  made  to  shine  in  commonplace  society.  Pie  could 
talk  admirably  about  something,  but  he  had  not  the 
gift  of  talking  about  nothing,  and  probably  would  not 
have  cared  much  to  cultivate  such  a  faculty.  He  was 
fond  of  suggesting  small  innovations  and  improve- 
ments in  established  systems,  to  the  annoyance  of  men 
with  set  ideas,  who  liked  their  own  ways  best.  Thus  it 
happened  that  he  remained  for  many  years,  if  not  exactly 
unappreciated,  yet  not  thoroughly  appreciated,  and  that 
a  considerable  and  very  influential  section  of  society  was 
always  ready  to  cavil  at  what  he  said,  and  find  motive 
for  suspicion  in  most  things  that  he  did.  Perhaps  he  was 
best  understood  and  most  cordially  appreciated  among 
the  poorer  classes  of  his  wife's  subjects.  He  found  also 
more  cordial  approval  generally  among  the  Radicals  than 
among  the  Tories,  or  even  the  Whigs. 

One  reform  which  Prince  Albert  worked  earnestly  to 
bring  about  was  the  abolition  of  duelling  in  the  army,  and 


134  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

the  substitution  of  some  system  of  courts  of  honorable 
arbitration  to  supersede  the  barbaric  recourse  to  the  decis- 
ion of  weapons.  He  did  not  succeed  in  having  his  courts 
of  honor  established.  There  was  something  too  fanciful 
in  the  scheme  to  attract  the  authorities  of  our  two  ser- 
vices ;  and  there  were  undoubtedly  many  practical  difficul- 
ties in  the  way  of  making  such  a  system  effective.  But  he 
succeeded  so  far,  that  he  induced  the  Duke  of  Wellington 
and  the  heads  of  the  services  to  turn  their  attention  very 
seriously  to  the  subject,  and  to  use  all  the  influence  in 
their  power  for  the  purpose  of  discouraging  and  discredit- 
ing the  odious  practice  of  the  duel.  It  is  carrying  courtly 
politeness  too  far  to  attribute  the  total  disappearance  of 
the  duelling  system,  as  one  biographer  seems  inclined 
to  do,  to  the  personal  efforts  of  Prince  Albert.  It  is 
enough  to  his  honor  that  he  did  his  best,  and  that  the 
best  was  a  substantial  contribution  toward  so  great 
an  object.  But  nothing  can  testify  more  strikingly  to 
the  rapid  growth  of  a  genuine  civilization  in  Queen 
Victoria's  reign  than  the  utter  discontinuance  of  the 
duelling  system.  "When  the  Queen  came  to  the  throne, 
and  for  years  after,  it  was  still  in  full  force.  The  duel  plays 
a  conspicuous  part  in  the  fiction  and  the  drama  of  the 
reign's  earlier  years.  It  was  a  common  incident  of  all 
political  controversies.  It  was  an  episode  of  most  con- 
tested elections.  It  was  often  resorted  to  for  the  purpose 
of  deciding  the  right  or  wrong  of  a  half-drunken  quarrel 
over  a  card-table.  It  formed  as  common  a  theme  of  gossip 
as  an  elopement  or  a  bankruptcy.  Most  of  the  eminent 
statesmen  who  were  prominent  in  the  earlier  part  of  the 
Queen's  reign  had  fought  duels.  Peel  and  O'Connell  had 
made  arrangements  for  a  "meeting."  Mr.  Disraeli  had 
challenged  O'Connell,  or  any  of  the  sons  of  O'Connell. 
The  great  agitator  himself  had  killed  his  man  in  a  duel. 
Mr.  Roebuck  had  gone  out ;  Mr.  Cobden,  at  a  much  later 


THE  QUEEN'S  MAERIAGE.  135 

period,  had  been  visited  with  a  challenge,  and  had  had 
the  good  sense  and  the  moral  courage  to  laugh  at  it.  At 
the  present  hour  a  duel  in  England  would  seem  as  absurd 
and  barbarous  an  anachronism  as  an  ordeal  by  touch  or  a 
witch-burning.  Many  years  have  passed  since  a  duel  was 
last  talked  of  in  Parliament ;  and  then  it  was  only  the 
subject  of  a  reprobation  that  had  some  work  to  do  to  keep 
its  countenance  while  administering  the  proper  rebuke. 
But  it  was  not  the  influence  of  any  one  man,  or  even 
any  class  of  men,  that  brought  about  in  so  short  a  time 
this  striking  change  in  the  tone  of  public  feeling  and 
morality.  The  change  was  part  of  the  growth  of  educa- 
tion and  of  civilization ;  of  the  strengthening  and  broaden- 
ing influence  of  the  press,  the  platform,  the  cheap  book, 
the  pulpit,  and  the  less  restricted  intercourse  of  classes. 

This  is,  perhaps,  as  suitable  a  place  as  any  other  to 
introduce  some  notice  of  the  attempts  that  were  made 
from  time  to  time  upon  the  life  of  the  Queen.  It  is  pro- 
per to  say  something  of  them,  although  not  one  possessed 
the  slightest  political  importance,  or  could  be  said  to 
illustrate  anything  more  than  sheer  lunacy,  or  that  mor- 
bid vanity  and  thirst  for  notoriety  that  is  nearly  akin  to 
genuine  madness.  The  first  attempt  was  made  on  June 
10th,  1840,  by  Edward  Oxford,  a  pot-boy  of  seventeen, 
who  fired  two  shots  at  the  Queen  as  she  was  driving  up 
Constitution  Hill  with  Prince  Albert.  Oxford  fired  both 
shots  deliberately  enough,  but  happily  missed  in  each 
case.  He  proved  to  have  been  an  absurd  creature,  half 
crazy  with  a  longing  to  consider  himself  a  political 
prisoner,  and  to  be  talked  of.  When  he  was  tried,  the 
jury  pronounced  him  insane,  and  he  was  ordered  to  be 
kept  in  a  lunatic  asylum  during  her  Majesty's  pleasure. 
The  trial  completely  dissipated  some  wild  alarms  that 
were  felt,  founded  chiefly  on  absurd  papers  in  Oxford's 
possession,  about  a  tremendous  secret  society  called 


136  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

"Young  England,"  having  among  its  other  objects  the 
assassination  of  royal  personages.  It  is  not  an  uninterest- 
ing illustration  of  the  condition  of  public  feeling,  that 
some  of  the  Irish  Catholic  papers  in  seeming  good  faith 
denounced  Oxford  as  an  agent  of  the  Duke  of  Cumberland 
and  the  Orangemen,  and  declared  that  the  object  was  to 
assassinate  the  Queen  and  put  the  Duke  on  the  throne. 
The  trial  showed  that  Oxford  was  the  agent  of  nobody, 
and  was  impelled  by  nothing  but  his  own  crack-brained 
love  of  notoriety.  The  finding  of  the  jury  was  evidently 
something  of  a  compromise,  for  it  is  very  doubtful  whether 
the  boy  was  insane  in  the  medical  sense,  and  whether  he 
was  fairly  to  be  held  irresponsible  for  his  actions.  But 
it  was  felt,  perhaps,  that  the  wisest  course  was  to  treat 
him  as  a  madman ;  and  the  result  did  not  prove  unsatis- 
factory. Mr.  Theodore  Martin,  in  his  "  Life  of  the  Prince 
Consort,"  expresses  a  different  opinion.  He  thinks  it 
would  have  been  well  if  Oxford  had  been  dealt  with  as 
guilty  in  the  ordinary  way.  "The  best  commentary," 
he  says,  "  on  the  lenity  thus  shown  was  pronounced  by 
Oxford  himself,  on  being  told  of  the  similar  attempts  of 
Francis  and  Bean  in  1842,  when  he  declared  that  if  he 
had  been  hanged  there  would  have  been  no  more  shooting 
at  the  Queen."  It  may  be  reasonably  doubted  whether 
the  authority  of  Oxford,  as  to  the  general  influence  of 
criminal  legislation,  is  very  valuable.  Against  the  philoso- 
phic opinion  of  the  half-crazy  young  pot-boy,  on  which 
Mr.  Martin  places  so  much  reliance,  may  be  set  the  fact 
that  in  other  countries  where  attempts  on  the  life  of  the 
sovereign  have  been  punished  by  the  stern  award  of  death, 
it  has  not  been  found  that  the  execution  of  one  fanatic 
was  a  safe  protection  against  the  murderous  fanaticism  of 
another. 

On  May  30th,  1842,  a  man  named  John  Francis,  son  of 
a  machinist  hi  Drury  Lane,  fired  a  pistol  at  the  Queen  as 


THE  QUEEN'S  MARRIAGE.  137 

she  was  driving  down  Constitution  Hill,  on  the  very  spot 
where  Oxford's  attempt  was  made.  This  was  a  somewhat 
serious  attempt,  for  Francis  was  not  more  than  a  few  feet 
from  the  carriage,  which  fortunately  was  driving  at  a  very 
rapid  rate.  The  Queen  showed  great  composure.  She 
was  in  some  measure  prepared  for  the  attempt,  for  it 
seems  certain  that  the  same  man  had  on  the  previous 
evening  presented  a  pistol  at  the  royal  carriage,  although 
he  did  not  then  fire  it.  Francis  was  arrested  and  put  on 
trial.  He  was  only  twenty-two  years  of  age,  and  although 
at  first  he  endeavored  to  brazen  it  out  and  put  on  a  sort 
of  melodramatic  regicide  aspect,  yet  when  the  sentence  of 
death  for  high-treason  was  passed  on  him,  he  fell  into  a 
swoon  and  was  carried  insensible  from  the  court.  The 
sentence  was  not  carried  into  effect.  It  was  not  certain 
whether  the  pistol  was  loaded  at  all,  and  whether  the 
whole  performance  was  not  a  mere  piece  of  brutal 
play-acting  done  out  of  a  longing  to  be  notorious.  Her 
Majesty,  herself,  was  anxious  that  the  death-sentence 
should  not  be  carried  into  effect,  and  it  was  finally  com- 
muted to  one  of  transportation  for  life.  The  very  day 
after  this  mitigation  of  punishment  became  publicly 
known,  another  attempt  was  made  by  a  hunch -backed  lad 
named  Bean.  As  the  Queen  was  passing  from  Bucking- 
ham Palace  to  the  Chapel  Royal,  Bean  presented  a  pistol 
at  her  carriage,  but  did  not  succeed  in  firing  it  before  his 
hand  was  seized  by  a  prompt  and  courageous  boy  who  was 
standing  near.  The  pistol  was  found  to  be  loaded  with 
powder,  paper  closely  rammed  down,  and  some  scraps  of 
a  clay  pipe.  It  may  be  asked  whether  the  argument  of 
Mr.  Martin  is  not  fully  borne  out  by  this  occurrence,  and 
whether  the  fact  of  Bean's  attempt  having  been  made 
on  the  day  after  the  commutation  of  the  capital  sentence 
in  the  case  of  Francis  is  not  evidence  that  the  leniency  in 
the  former  instance  was  the  cause  of  the  attempt  made 


138  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

in  the  latter.  But  it  was  made  clear,  and  the  fact  is 
recorded  on  the  authority  of  Prince  Albert  himself,  that 
Bean  had  announced  his  determination  to  make  the 
attempt  several  days  before  the  sentence  of  Francis  was 
commuted,  and  while  Francis  was  actually  lying  under 
sentence  of  death.  With  regard  to  Francis  himself,  the 
Prince  was  clearly  of  opinion  that  to  carry  out  the  capital 
sentence  would  have  been  nothing  less  than  a  judicial 
murder,  as  it  is  essential  that  the  act  should  be  committed 
with  intent  to  kill  or  wound,  and  in  Francis's  case,  to  all 
appearance,  this  was  not  the  fact,  or  at  least  it  was  open 
to  grave  doubt.  In  this  calm  and  wise  way  did  the  hus- 
band of  the  Queen,  who  had  always  shared  with  her 
whatever  of  danger  there  might  be  in  the  attempts,  argue 
as  to  the  manner  in  which  they  ought  to  be  dealt  with. 
The  ambition  which  most,  or  all  of  the  miscreants,  who 
thus  disturbed  the  Queen  and  the  country  was  that  of  the 
mountebank  rather  than  of  the  assassin.  The  Queen  her- 
self showed  how  thoroughly  she  understood  the  signifi- 
cance of  all  that  had  happened,  when  she  declared,  accord- 
ing to  Mr.  Martin,  that  she  expected  a  repetition  of  the 
attempts  on  her  life  so  long  as  the  law  remained  unaltered 
by  which  they  could  be  dealt  with  only  as  acts  of  high- 
treason.  The  seeming  dignity  of  martydom  had  some- 
thing fascinating  in  it  to  morbid  vanity  or  crazy  fanati- 
cism, while,  on  the  other  hand,  it  was  almost  certain  that 
the  martyr's  penalty  would  not  in  the  end  be  inflicted.  A 
very  appropriate  change  in  the  law  was  effected  by  which 
a  punishment  at  once  sharp  and  degrading  was  provided 
even  for  mere  mountebank  attempts  against  the  Queen — 
a  punishment  which  was  certain  to  be  inflicted.  A  bill 
was  introduced  by  Sir  Robert  Peel  making  such  attempts 
punishable  by  transportation  for  seven  years,  or  by 
imprisonment  for  a  term  not  exceeding  three  years,  "  the 
culprit  to  be  publicly  or  privately  whipped  as  often  and 


THE  Q UEEN'  S  MARKIA GE,  1 39 

in  such  manner  as  the  court  shall  direct,  not  exceeding 
thrice."  Bean  was  convicted  under  this  act,  and  sen- 
tenced to  eighteen  months'  imprisonment  in  Millbank 
Penitentiary.  This  did  not,  however,  conclude  the 
attacks  on  the  Queen.  An  Irish  bricklayer,  named 
Hamilton,  fired  a  pistol,  charged  only  with  powder,  at  her 
Majesty,  on  Constitution  Hill,  on  May  19th,  1849,  and 
was  sentenced  to  seven  years'  transportation.  A  man 
named  Robert  Pate,  once  a  lieutenant  of  hussars,  struck 
her  Majesty  on  the  face  with  a  stick  as  she  was  leaving 
the  Duke  of  Cambridge's  residence  in  her  carriage  on  May 
27th,  1850.  This  man  was  sentenced  to  seven  years' 
transportation,  but  the  judge  paid  so  much  attention 
to  the  plea  of  insanity  set  up  on  his  behalf,  as  to  omit 
from  his  punishment  the  whipping  which  might  have 
been  ordered.  Finally,  on  February  29th,  1872,  a  lad  of 
seventeen,  named  Arthur  O'Connor,  presented  a  pistol 
at  the  Queen  as  she  was  entering  Buckingham  Palace 
after  a  drive.  The  pistol,  however  proved  to  be  unloaded 
— an  antique  and  useless  or  harmless  weapon,  with  a 
flintlock  which  was  broken,  and  in  the  barrel  a  piece  of 
greasy  red  rag.  The  wretched  lad  held  a  paper  in  one 
hand,  which  was  found  to  be  some  sort  of  petition  on 
behalf  of  the  Fenian  prisoners.  "When  he  came  up  for 
trial  a  plea  of  insanity  was  put  in  on  his  behalf,  but 
he  did  not  seem  to  be  insane  in  the  sense  of  being 
irresponsible  for  his  actions  or  incapable  of  under- 
standing the  penalty  they  involved,  and  he  was  sentenced 
to  twelve  months'  imprisonment  and  a  whipping.  We 
have  hurried  over  many  years  for  the  purpose  of  com- 
pleting this  painful  and  ludicrous  catalogue  of  the  attempts 
made  against  the  Queen.  It  will  be  seen  that  in  not  a 
single  instance  was  there  the  slightest  political  significance 
to  be  attached  to  them.  Even  in  our  own  softened  and 
civilized  time  it  sometimes  happens  that  an  attempt  is 


140  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

made  on  the  life  of  a  sovereign  which,  however  we  may 
condemn  and  reprobate  it  on  moral  grounds,  yet  does 
seem  to  bear  a  distinct  political  meaning,  and  to  show 
that  there  are  fanatical  minds  still  burning  under  some 
sense  of  national  or  personal  wrong.  But  in  the  various 
attacks  which  were  made  on  Queen  Victoria  nothing  of 
the  kind  was  even  pretended.  There  was  no  opportunity 
for  any  vaporing  about  Brutus  and  Charlotte  Corday. 
The  impulse,  where  it  was  not  that  of  sheer  insanity,  was 
of  kin  to  the  vulgar  love  of  notoriety  in  certain  minds 
which  sets  on  those  whom  it  pervades  to  mutilate  noble 
works  of  art  and  scrawl  their  autographs  on  the  marble 
of  immortal  monuments.  There  was  a  great  deal  of 
wisdom  shown  in  not  dealing  too  severely  with  most  of 
these  offences,  and  in  not  treating  them  too  much  au 
serieux.  Prince  Albert  himself  said  that  "  the  vindictive 
feeling  of  the  common  people  would  be  a  thousand  times 
more  dangerous  than  the  madness  of  individuals."  There 
was  not,  indeed,  the  slightest  danger  at  any  time  that  the 
"  common  people  "  of  England  could  be  wrought  up  to  any 
sympathy  with  assassination  ;  nor  was  this  what  Prince 
Albert  meant.  But  the  Queen  and  her  husband  were  yet 
new  to  power,  and  the  people  had  not  quite  lost  all 
memory  of  sovereigns  who,  well-meaning  enough,  had  yet 
scarcely  understood  constitutional  government,  and  there 
were  wild  rumors  of  reaction  this  way  and  revolution  that 
way.  It  might  have  fomented  a  feeling  of  distrust  and  dis- 
satisfaction if  the  people  had  seen  any  disposition  on  the 
part  of  those  in  authority  to  strain  the  criminal  law  for 
the  sake  of  enforcing  a  death  penalty  against  creatures 
like  Oxford  and  Bean.  The  most  alarming  and  unnerving 
of  all  dangers  to  a  ruler  is  that  of  assassination.  Even 
the  best  and  most  blameless  sovereign  is  not  wholly  secure 
against  it.  The  hand  of  Oxford  might  have  killed  the 
Queen.  Perhaps,  however,  the  best  protection  a  sovereign 


THE  q  UEEIT  S  MAERIA GE.  141 

can  have  is  not,  to  exaggerate  the  danger.  There  is  no 
safety  in  mere  severity  of  punishment.  Where  the  attempt 
is  serious  and  desperate,  it  is  that  of  a  fanaticism  which 
holds  its  life  in  its  hand,  and  is  not  to  be  deterred  hy  fear 
of  death.  The  tortures  of  Ravaillac  did  not  deter  Damiens. 
The  birch  hi  the  case  of  Bean  and  O'Connor  may  effectively 
discountenance  enterprises  which  are  born  of  the  mounte- 
bank's and  not  the  fanatic's  spirit. 


142  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

THE    OPIUM   WAK. 

THE  Opium  dispute  with  China  was  going  on  when  the 
Queen  came  to  the  throne.  The  Opium  War  broke  out 
soon  after.  On  March  3d,  1843,  five  huge  wagons,  each 
of  them  drawn  by  four  horses,  and  the  whole  under  escort 
of  a  detachment  of  the  60th  Regiment,  arrived  in  front  of 
the  Mint.  An  immense  crowd  followed  the  wagons.  It 
was  seen  that  they  were  filled  with  boxes ;  and  one  of  the 
boxes  having  been  somewhat  broken  in  its  journey,  the 
crowd  were  able  to  see  that  it  was  crammed  full  of  odd- 
looking  silver  coins.  The  lookers-on  were  delighted,  as 
well  as  amused,  by  the  sight  of  this  huge  consignment  of 
treasure ;  and  when  it  became  known  that  the  silver  money 
was  the  first  instalment  of  the  China  ransom,  there  were 
lusty  cheers  given  as  the  wagons  passed  through  the  gates 
of  the  Mint.  This  was  a  payment  on  account  of  the  war 
indemnity  imposed  on  China.  Nearly  four  millions  and  a 
half  sterling  was  the  sum  of  the  indemnity,  in  addition  to 
one  million  and  a  quarter  which  had  already  been  paid  by 
the  Chinese  authorities.  Many  readers  may  remember 
that  for  some  time  "  China  money  "  was  regularly  set  down 
as  an  item  hi  the  revenues  of  each  year  with  which  the 
Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  had  to  deal.  The  China 
War,  of  which  this  money  was  the  spoil,  was  not,  per- 
haps, an  event  of  which  the  nation  was  entitled  to  be 
very  proud.  It  was  the  precursor  of  other  wars;  the 


THE  OPIUM  WAR.  143 

policy  on  which  it  was  conducted  has  never  since  ceased 
altogether  to  be  a  question  of  more  or  less  excited  contro- 
versy; but  it  may  safely  be  asserted  that  if  the  same 
events  were  to  occur  in  our  day  it  would  be  hardly  possi- 
ble to  find  a  ministry  to  originate  a  war,  for  which  at  the 
same  time  it  must  be  owned  that  the  vast  majority  of  the 
people,  of  all  politics  and  classes,  were  only  too  ready 
then  to  find  excuse  and  even  justification.  The  wagon- 
loads  of  silver  conveyed  into  the  Mint  amidst  the  cheers 
of  the  crowd  were  the  spoils  of  the  famous  Opium  War. 
Reduced  to  plain  words,  the  principle  for  which  we 
fought  in  the  China  War  was  the  right  of  Great  Britain 
to  force  a  peculiar  trade  upon  a  foreign  people  in  spite  of 
the  protestations  of  the  Government  and  all  such  public 
opinion  as  there  was  of  the  nation.  Of  course  this  was 
not  the  avowed  motive  of  the  war.  Not  often  in  history 
is  the  real  and  inspiring  motive  of  a  war  proclaimed  in  so 
many  words  by  those  who  carry  it  on.  Not  often,  indeed, 
is  it  seen,  naked  and  avowed,  even  in  the  minds  of  its  pro- 
moters themselves.  As  the  quarrel  between  this  country 
and  China  went  on,  a  great  many  minor  and  incidental  sub- 
jects of  dispute  arose,  which  for  the  moment  put  the  one 
main  and  original  question  out  of  people's  minds ;  and  in 
the  course  of  these  discussions  it  happened  more  than  once 
that  the  Chinese  authorities  took  some  steps  which  put 
them  decidedly  in  the  wrong.  Thus  it  is  true  enough 
that  there  were  particular  passages  of  the  controversy 
when  the  English  Government  had  all  or  nearly  all  of  the 
right  on  their  side,  so  far  as  the  immediate  incident  of  the 
dispute  was  concerned ;  and  when,  if  that  had  been  the 
whole  matter  of  quarrel,  or  if  the  quarrel  had  begun  there, 
a  patriotic  minister  might  have  been  justified  in  thinking 
that  the  Chinese  were  determined  to  offend  England  and 
deserved  humiliation.  But  no  consideration  of  this  kind 
can  now  hide  from  our  eyes  the  fact  that  in  the  beginning 


144  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

and  the  very  origin  of  the  quarrel  we  were  distinctly  in 
the  wrong.  We  asserted  or  at  least  acted  on  the  asser- 
tion of  a  claim  so  unreasonable  and  even  monstrous,  that 
it  never  could  have  been  made  upon  any  nation  strong 
enough  to  render  its  assertion  a  matter  of  serious  respon- 
sibility. The  most  important  lessons  a  nation  can  learn 
from  its  own  history  are  found  in  the  exposure  of  its  own 
errors.  Historians  have  sometimes  done  more  evil  than 
court  flatterers  when  they  have  gone  about  to  glorify  the 
errors  of  their  own  people,  and  to  make  wrong  appear 
right  because  an  English  Government  talked  the  public 
opinion  of  the  time  into  a  confusion  of  principles. 

The  whole  principle  of  Chinese  civilization,  at  the  time 
when  the  Opium  War  broke  out,  was  based  on  conditions 
which  to  any  modern  nation  must  seem  erroneous  and 
unreasonable.  The  Chinese  governments  and  people 
desired  to  have  no  political  relations  or  dealings  whatever 
with  any  other  state.  They  were  not  so  obstinately  set 
against  private  and  commercial  dealings  ;  but  they  would 
have  no  political  intercourse  with  foreigners,  and  they 
would  not  even  recognize  the  existence  of  foreign  people 
as  states.  They  were  perfectly  satisfied  with  themselves 
and  their  own  systems.  They  were  convinced  that  their 
own  systems  were  not  only  wise  but  absolutely  perfect. 
It  is  superfluous  to  say  that  this  was  in  itself  evidence  of 
ignorance  and  self-conceit.  A  belief  hi  the  perfection  of 
their  own  systems  could  only  exist  among  a  people  who 
knew  nothing  of  any  other  systems.  But  absurd  as  the 
idea  must  appear  to  us,  yet  the  Chinese  might  have  found 
a  good  deal  to  say  for  it.  It  was  the  result  of  civilization 
so  ancient  that  the  oldest  events  preserved  hi  European 
history  were  but  as  yesterday  in  the  comparison.  What- 
ever its  errors  and  defects,  it  was  distinctly  a  civilization. 
It  was  a  system  with  a  literature  and  laws  and  institutions 
of  its  own ;  it  was  a  coherent  and  harmonious  social  and 


THE  OPIUM  WAR.  145 

political  system  which  had,  on  the  whole,  worked  toler- 
ably well.  It  was  not  very  unlike,  in  its  principles,  the 
kind  of  civilization  which  at  one  time  it  was  the  whim  of 
men  of  genius,  like  Rousseau  and  Diderot,  to  idealize  and 
admire.  The  European,  of  whatever  nation,  may  be  said 
to  like  change,  and  to  believe  in  its  necessity.  His  in- 
stincts and  his  convictions  alike  tend  this  way.  The  sleep- 
iest of  Europeans — the  Neapolitan,  who  lies  with  his  feet 
in  the  water  on  the  Chiaja ;  the  Spaniard,  who  smokes  his 
cigar  and  sips  his  coffee  as  if  life  had  no  active  business 
whatever;  the  fldneur  of  the  Paris  boulevards  ;  the  beggar 
who  lounged  from  cabin  to  cabin  in  Ireland  a  generation 
ago — all  these,  no  matter  how  little  inclined  for  change 
themselves,  would  be  delighted  to  hear  of  travel  and 
enterprise,  and  of  new  things  and  new  discoveries.  But 
to  the  Chinese,  of  all  Eastern  races,  the  very  idea  of  travel 
and  change  was  something  repulsive  and  odious.  As  the 
thought  of  having  to  go  a  day  unwashed  would  be  to  the 
educated  Englishman  of  our  age,  or  as  the  edge  of  a  preci- 
pice is  to  a  nervous  man,  so  was  the  idea  of  innovation 
to  the  Chinese  of  that  time.  The  ordinary  Oriental  dreads 
and  detests  change ;  but  the  Chinese  at  that  time  went  as 
far  beyond  the  ordinary  Oriental  as  the  latter  goes  be- 
yond an  average  Englishman.  In  the  present  day  a  con- 
siderable alteration  has  taken  place  in  this  respect.  The 
Chinese  have  had  innovation  after  innovation  forced  on 
them,  until  at  last  they  have  taken  up  with  the  new  order 
of  things,  like  people  who  feel  that  it  is  idle  to  resist  their 
fate  any  longer.  The  emigration  from  China  has  been  as 
remarkable  as  that  from  Ireland  or  Germany;  and  the 
United  States  finds  itself  confronted  with  a  question  of 
the  first  magnitude  when  it  asks  itself  what  is  to  be  the 
influence  and  operation  of  the  descent  of  the  Chinese 
populations  along  the  Pacific  slope.  Japan  has  put  on 
modern  and  European  civilization  like  a  garment.  Japan 

10 


146  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

effected  in  a  few  years  a  revolution  in  the  political  con- 
stitution and  the  social  habits  of  her  people,  and  in  their 
very  way  of  looking  at  things,  the  like  of  which  no  other 
state  ever  accomplished  in  a  century.  But  nothing  of  all 
this  was  thought  of  at  the  time  of  the  China  War.  The 
one  thing  which  China  asked  of  European  civilization 
and  the  thing  called  Modern  Progress  was  to  be  let  alone. 
China's  prayer  to  Europe  was  that  of  Diogenes  to  Alex- 
ander— "  Stand  out  of  my  sunshine." 

It  was,  as  we  have  said,  to  political  relationships  rather 
than  to  private  and  commercial  dealings  with  foreign 
peoples  that  the  Chinese  felt  an  unconquerable  objection. 
They  did  not,  indeed,  like  even  private  and  commercial 
dealings  with  foreigners.  They  would  much  rather  have 
lived  without  ever  seeing  the  face  of  a  foreigner.  But 
they  had  put  up  with  the  private  intrusion  of  foreigners 
and  trade,  and  had  had  dealings  with  American  traders, 
and  with  the  East  India  Company.  The  charter  and  the 
exclusive  rights  of  the  East  India  Company  expired  in 
April,  1834;  the  charter  was  renewed  under  different  con- 
ditions, and  the  trade  with  China  was  thrown  open.  One 
of  the  great  branches  of  the  East  India  Company's  busi- 
ness with  China  was  the  opium  trade.  When  the  trading 
privileges  ceased  this  traffic  was  taken  up  briskly  by 
private  merchants,  who  bought  of  the  Company  the  opium 
which  they  grew  in  India  and  sold  it  to  the  Chinese. 
The  Chinese  governments,  and  all  teachers,  moralists,  and 
persons  of  education  in  China,  had  long  desired  to  get  rid 
of  or  put  down  this  trade  in  opium.  They  considered  it 
highly  detrimental  to  the  morals,  the  health,  and  the  pros- 
perity of  the  people.  Of  late  the  destructive  effects  of 
opium  have  often  been  disputed,  particularly  in  the  House 
of  Commons.  It  has  been  said  that  it  is  not,  on  the 
average,  nearly  so  unwholesome  as  the  Chinese  govern- 
ments always  thought,  and  that  it  does  not  do  as  much  pro- 


THE  OPIUM  WAR.  147 

portionate  harm  to  China  as  the  use  of  brandy,  whiskey, 
and  gin  does  to  England.  It  seems  to  this  writer  hardly 
possible  to  doubt  that  the  use  of  opium  is,  on  the  whole, 
a  curse  to  any  nation  ;  but  even  if  this  were  not  so,  the 
question  between  England  and  the  Chinese  governments 
would  remain  just  the  same.  The  Chinese  governments 
may  have  taken  exaggerated  views  of  the  evils  of  the 
opium  trade;  their  motives  in  wishing  to  put  it  down 
may  have  been  mixed  with  considerations  of  interest  as 
much  political  as  philanthropic.  Lord  Palmerston  in- 
sisted that  the  Chinese  Government  were  not  sincere  in 
their  professed  objection  on  moral  grounds  to  the  traffic. 
If  they  were  sincere,  he  asked,  why  did  they  not  prevent 
the  growth  of  the  poppy  in  China  ?  It  was,  he  tersely  put 
it,  an  "  exportation  of  bullion  question,  an  agricultural 
protection  question  ; "  it  was  a  question  of  the  poppy  in- 
terest in  China,  and  of  the  economists  who  wished  to  pre- 
vent the  exportation  of  the  precious  metals.  It  is  curious 
that  such  arguments  as  this  could  have  weighed  with  any 
one  for  a  moment.  It  was  no  business  of  ours  to  ask  our- 
selves whether  the  Chinese  Government  were  perfectly 
sincere  in  their  professions  of  a  lofty  morality,  or  whether 
they,  unlike  all  other  governments  that  have  ever  been 
known,  were  influenced  by  one  sole  motive  in  the  making 
of  their  regulations.  All  that  had  nothing  to  do  with  the 
question.  States  are  not  at  liberty  to  help  the  subjects  of 
other  states  to  break  the  laws  of  their  own  governments. 
Especially  when  these  laws  even  profess  to  concern  ques- 
tions of  morals,  is  it  the  duty  of  foreign  states  not  to  in- 
terfere with  the  regulations  which  a  government  considers 
it  necessary  to  impose  for  the  protection  of  its  people. 
All  traffic  in  opium  was  strictly  forbidden  by  the  govern- 
ments and  laws  of  China ;  yet  our  English  traders  carried 
on  a  brisk  and  profitable  trade  in  the  forbidden  article. 
Nor  was  this  merely  an  ordinary  smuggling,  or  a  business 


148  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

akin  to  that  of  the  blockade-running  during  the  American 
civil  war.  The  arrangements  with  the  Chinese  Govern- 
ment allowed  the  existence  of  all  establishments  and 
machinery  for  carrying  on  a  general  trade  at  Canton 
and  Macao ;  and  under  cover  of  these  arrangements  the 
opium  traders  set  up  their  regular  head-quarters  in  these 
towns. 

Let  us  find  an  illustration  intelligible  to  readers  of  the 
present  day  to  show  how  unjustifiable  was  this  practice. 
The  State  of  Maine,  as  every  one  knows,  prohibits  the 
common  sale  of  spirituous  liquors.  Let  us  suppose  that 
several  companies  of  English  merchants  were  formed  in 
Portland  and  Augusta,  and  the  other  towns  of  Maine,  for 
the  purpose  of  brewing  beer  and  distilling  whiskey,  and 
selling  both  to  the  public  of  Maine  in  defiance  of  the  state 
laws.  Let  us  further  suppose  that  when  the  authorities 
of  Maine  proceeded  to  put  the  state  laws  in  force  against 
these  intruders,  our  Government  here  took  up  the  cause 
of  the  whiskey-sellers,  and  sent  an  iron-clad  fleet  to  Port- 
land to  compel  the  people  of  Maine  to  put  up  with  them- 
It  seems  impossible  to  think  of  any  English  Government 
taking  such  a  course  as  this ;  or  of  the  English  public 
enduring  it  for  one  moment.  In  the  case  of  such  a  nation 
as  the  United  States,  nothing  of  the  kind  would  be  possi- 
ble. The  serious  responsibilities  of  any  such  undertaking 
would  make  even  the  most  thoughtless  minister  pause, 
and  would  give  the  public  in  general  some  time  to  think 
the  matter  over ;  and  before  any  freak  of  the  kind  could 
be  attempted  the  conscience  of  the  nation  would  be 
aroused,  and  the  unjust  policy  would  have  to  be  aban- 
doned. But  in  dealing  with  China  the  ministry  never 
seems  to  have  thought  the  right  or  wrong  of  the  question 
a  matter  worthy  of  any  consideration.  The  controversy 
was  entered  upon  with  as  light  a  heart  as  a  modern  war 
of  still  graver  moment.  The  people  in  general  knew 


THE  OPIUM  WAR.  149 

nothing  about  the  matter  until  it  had  gone  so  far  that  the 
original  point  of  dispute  was  almost  out  of  sight,  and  it 
seemed  as  if  the  safety  of  English  subjects  and  the  honor 
of  England  were  compromised  in  some  way  by  the  high- 
handed proceedings  of  the  Chinese  Government. 

The  English  Government  appointed  superintendents  to 
manage  our  commercial  dealings  with  China.  Unluckily 
these  superintendents  were  in  vested  with  a  sort  of  political 
or  diplomatic  character,  and  thus  from  the  first  became 
objectionable  to  the  Chinese  authorities.  One  of  the  first 
of  these  superintendents  acted  in  disregard  of  the  express 
instructions  of  his  own  Government.  He  was  told  that  he 
must  not  pass  the  entrance  of  the  Canton  River  in  a  vessel 
of  war,  as  the  Chinese  authorities  always  made  a  marked 
distinction  between  ships  of  war  and  merchant  vessels  in 
regard  to  the  freedom  of  intercourse.  Misunderstandings 
occurred  at  every  new  step  of  negotiation.  These  misun- 
derstandings were  natural.  Our  people  knew  hardly  any- 
thing about  the  Chinese.  The  limitation  of  our  means  of 
communication  with  them  made  this  ignorance  inevitable, 
but  certainly  did  not  excuse  our  acting  as  if  we  were  in 
possession  of  the  fullest  and  most  accurate  information. 
The  manner  in  which  some  of  our  official  instructors  went 
on  was  well  illustrated  by  a  sentence  in  the  speech  of  Sir 
James  Graham,  during  the  debate  on  the  whole  subject  in 
the  House  of  Commons  in  April,  1840.  It  was,  Sir  James 
Graham  said,  as  if  a  foreigner  who  was  occasionally  per- 
mitted to  anchor  at  the  Nore,  and  at  times  to  land  at 
Wapping,  being  placed  in  close  confinement  during  his 
continuance  there,  were  to  pronounce  a  deliberate  opinion 
upon  the  resources,  the  genius,  and  the  character  of  the 
British  Empire. 

Our  representatives  were  generally  disposed  to  be  un- 
yielding ;  and  not  only  that,  but  to  see  deliberate  offence 
in  every  Chinese  usage  or  ceremony  which  the  authorities 


150  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

endeavored  to  impose  on  them.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is 
clear  that  the  Chinese  authorities  thoroughly  detested 
them  and  their  mission,  and  all  about  them,  and  often 
made  or  countenanced  delays  that  were  unnecessary,  and 
interferences  which  were  disagreeable  and  offensive.  The 
Chinese  believed  from  the  first  that  the  superintendents 
were  there  merely  to  protect  the  opium  trade,  and  to  force 
on  China  political  relations  with  the  West.  Practically 
this  was  the  effect  of  their  presence.  The  superinten- 
dents took  no  steps  to  aid  the  Chinese  authorities  in 
stopping  the  hated  trade.  The  British  traders  naturally 
enough  thought  that  the  British  Government  were  deter- 
mined to  protect  them  in  carrying  it  on.  Indeed,  the 
superintendents  themselves  might  well  have  had  the  same 
conviction.  The  Government  at  home  allowed  Captain 
Elliott,  the  chief  superintendent,  to  make  appeal  after 
appeal  for  instructions  without  paying  the  slightest  atten- 
tion to  him.  Captain  Elliott  saw  that  the  opium  traders 
were  growing  more  and  more  reckless  and  audacious ; 
that  they  were  thrusting  their  trade  under  the  very  eyes 
of  the  Chinese  authorities.  He  also  saw,  as  every  one  on 
the  spot  must  have  seen,  that  the  authorities,  who  had 
been  somewhat  apathetic  for  a  long  time,  were  now  at  last 
determined  to  go  any  lengths  to  put  down  the  traffic. 
At  length  the  English  Government  announced  to  Captain 
Elliott  the  decision  which  they  ought  to  have  made  known 
months,  not  to  say  years  before,  that  "  her  Majesty's  Gov- 
ernment could  not  interfere  for  the  purpose  of  enabling 
British  subjects  to  violate  the  laws  of  the  country  with 
which  they  trade  ; "  and  that  "  any  loss,  therefore,  which 
such  persons  may  suffer  in  consequence  of  the  more 
effectual  execution  of  the  Chinese  laws  on  this  subject 
must  be  borne  by  the  parties  who  have  brought  that  loss 
on  themselves  by  their  own  acts."  This  very  wise  and 
proper  resolve  came,  however,  too  late.  The  British 


THE  OPIUM  WAR.  151 

traders  had  been  allowed  to  go  on  for  a  long  time  under 
the  full  conviction  that  the  protection  of  the  English 
Government  was  behind  them,  and  wholly  at  their  service. 
Captain  Elliott  himself  seems  to  have  now  believed  that 
the  announcement  of  his  superiors  was  but  a  graceful 
diplomatic  figure  of  speech.  When  the  Chinese  authorities 
actually  proceeded  to  insist  on  the  forfeiture  of  an  im- 
mense quantity  of  the  opium  in  the  hand  of  British  traders, 
and  took  other  harsh  but  certainly  not  unnatural  meas- 
ures to  extinguish  the  traffic,  Captain  Elliott  sent  to  the 
Governor  of  India  a  request  for  as  many  ships  of  war  as 
could  be  spared  for  the  protection  of  the  life  and  prop- 
erty of  Englishmen  in  China.  Before  long  British  ships 
arrived,  and  the  two  countries  were  at  war. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  describe  the  successive  steps  by 
which  the  war  came  on.  It  was  inevitable  from  the  mo- 
ment that  the  English  superintendent  identified  himself 
with  the  protection  of  the  opium  trade.  The  English 
believed  that  the  Chinese  authorities  were  determined  on 
war,  and  only  waiting  for  a  convenient  moment  to  make  a 
treacherous  beginning.  The  Chinese  were  convinced  that 
from  the  first  we  had  meant  nothing  but  war.  Such  a 
condition  of  feeling  on  both  sides  would  probably  have 
made  war  unavoidable,  even  in  the  case  of  two  nations 
who  had  far  much  better  ways  of  understanding  each 
other  than  the  English  and  Chinese.  It  is  not  surprising 
if  the  English  people  at  home  knew  little  of  the  original 
causes  of  the  controversy.  All  that  presented  itself  to 
their  mind  was  the  fact  that  Englishmen  were  in  danger 
in  a  foreign  country ;  that  they  were  harshly  treated 
and  recklessly  imprisoned;  that  their  lives  were  in 
jeopardy,  and  that  the  flag  of  England  was  insulted. 
There  was  a  general  notion,  too,  that  the  Chinese  were  a 
barbarous  and  a  ridiculous  people,  who  had  no  alphabet, 
and  thought  themselves  much  better  than  any  other  people, 


152  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

even  the  English,  and  that  on  the  whole  it  would  be  a 
good  thing  to  take  the  conceit  out  of  them.  Those  who 
remember  what  the  common  feeling  of  ordinary  society 
was  at  the  time,  will  admit  that  it  did  not  reach  a  much 
loftier  level  than  this.  The  matter  was,  however,  taken 
up  more  seriously  in  Parliament. 

The  policy  of  the  Government  was  challenged  in  the 
House  of  Commons,  but  with  results  of  more  importance  to 
the  existing  composition  of  the  English  Cabinet  than  to 
the  relations  between  this  country  and  China.  Sir  James 
Graham  moved  a  resolution  condemning  the  policy  of 
ministers  for  having,  by  its  uncertainty  and  other  errors, 
brought  about  the  war,  which,  however,  he  did  not  then 
think  it  possible  to  avoid.  A  debate  which  continued  for 
three  days  took  place.  It  was  marked  by  the  same  curious 
mixture  of  parties  which  we  have  seen  in  debates  on  China 
questions  in  days  nearer  to  the  present.  The  defence 
of  the  Government  was  opened  by  Mr.  Macaulay,  who 
had  been  elected  for  Edinburgh  and  appointed  Secretary 
at  War.  The  defence  consisted  chiefly  hi  the  argu- 
ment that  we  could  not  have  put  the  trade  in  opium 
down,  no  matter  how  earnest  we  had  been,  and  that  it 
was  not  necessary  or  possible  to  keep  on  issuing  fre- 
quent instructions  to  agents  so  far  away  as  our  represent- 
atives in  China.  Mr.  Macaulay  actually  drew,  from  our 
experience  in  India,  an  argument  in  support  of  his  posi- 
tion. We  cannot  govern  India  from  London,  he  insisted ; 
we  must,  for  the  most  part,  govern  India  hi  India.  One 
can  imagine  how  Macaulay  would,  in  one  of  his  essays, 
have  torn  into  pieces  such  an  argument  coming  from  any 
advocate  of  a  policy  opposed  to  his  own.  The  reply,  in- 
deed, is  almost  too  obvious  to  need  any  exposition.  In 
India  the  complete  materials  of  administration  were  in 
existence.  There  was  a  Governor-general;  there  were 
councillors ;  there  was  an  army.  The  men  best  qualified 


THE  OPIUM  WAR.  153 

to  rule  the  country  were  there,  provided  with  all  the 
appliances  and  forces  of  rule.  In  China  we  had  an  agent 
with  a  vague  and  anomalous  office  dropped  down  in  the 
middle  of  a  hostile  people,  possessed  neither  of  recognized 
authority  nor  of  power  to  enforce  its  recognition.  It  was 
probably  true  enough  that  we  could  not  have  put  down 
the  opium  trade ;  that  even  with  all  the  assistance  of  the 
Chinese  Government  we  could  have  done  no  more  than  to 
drive  it  from  one  port  in  order  to  see  it  make  its  appear- 
ance at  another.  But  what  we  ought  to  have  done  is, 
therefore,  only  the  more  clear.  We  ought  to  have  an- 
nounced from  the  first,  and  in  the  firmest  tone,  that  we 
would  have  nothing  to  do  with  the  trade ;  that  we  would 
not  protect  it ;  and  we  ought  to  have  held  to  this  determi- 
nation. As  it  was,  we  allowed  our  traders  to  remain  un- 
der the  impression  that  we  were  willing  to  support  them 
until  it  was  too  late  to  undeceive  them  with  any  profit  to 
their  safety  or  our  credit.  The  Chinese  authorities  acted 
after  awhile  with  a  high-handed  disregard  of  fairness,  and 
of  anything  like  what  we  should  call  the  responsibility  of 
law ;  but  it  is  evident  that  they  believed  they  were  them- 
selves the  objects  of  lawless  intrusion  and  enterprise. 
There  were  on  the  part  of  the  Government  great  efforts 
made  to  represent  the  motion  as  an  attempt  to  prevent 
the  ministry  from  exacting  satisfaction  from  the  Chinese 
Government,  and  from  protecting  the  lives  and  interests 
of  Englishmen  in  China.  But  it  is  unfortunately  only  too 
often  the  duty  of  statesmen  to  recognize  the  necessity  of 
carrying  on  a  war,  even  while  they  are  of  opinion  that 
they  whose  mismanagement  brought  about  the  war 
deserve  condemnation.  When  Englishmen  are  being  im- 
prisoned and  murdered,  the  innocent  just  as  well  as  the 
guilty,  in  a  foreign  country — when,  in  short,  war  is 
actually  going  on — it  is  not  possible  for  English  states- 
men in  opposition  to  say,  "  We  will  not  allow  England  to 


154  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

strike  a  blow  in  defence  of  our  fellow-countrymen  and 
our  flag,  because  we  are  of  opinion  that  better  judgment 
on  the  part  of  our  Government  would  have  spared  us  the 
beginning  of  such  a  war."  There  was  really  no  incon- 
sistency in  recognizing  the  necessity  of  carrying  on  the 
war,  and  at  the  same  time  censuring  the  ministry  who 
had  allowed  the  necessity  to  be  forced  upon  us.  Sir 
Robert  Peel  quoted  with  great  effect,  during  the  debate, 
the  example  of  Fox,  who  declared  his  readiness  to  give 
every  help  to  the  prosecution  of  a  war  which  the  very 
same  day  he  proposed  to  censure  the  ministry  for  having 
brought  upon  the  country.  With  all  their  efforts,  the 
ministers  were  only  able  to  command  a  majority  of  nine 
votes  as  the  result  of  the  three  days'  debate. 

The  war,  however,  went  on.  It  was  easy  work  enough 
so  far  as  England  was  concerned.  It  was  on  our  side 
nothing  but  a  succession  of  cheap  victories.  The  Chinese 
fought  very  bravely  in  a  great  many  instances ;  and  they 
showed  still  more  often  a  Spartan-like  resolve  not  to  sur- 
vive defeat.  When  one  of  the  Chinese  cities  was  taken 
by  Sir  Hugh  Gough,  the  Tartar  general  went  into  his 
house  as  soon  as  he  saw  that  all  was  lost,  made  his  serv- 
ants set  fire  to  the  building,  and  calmly  sat  in  his  chair 
until  he  was  burned  to  death.  One  of  the  English  offi- 
cers writes  of  the  same  attack,  that  it  was  impossible  to 
compute  the  loss  of  the  Chinese,  "  for  when  they  found 
they  could  stand  no  longer  against  us,  they  cut  the  throats 
of  their  wives  and  children,  or  drove  them  into  wells  or 
ponds,  and  then  destroyed  themselves.  In  many  houses 
there  were  from  eight  to  twelve  dead  bodies,  and  I  myself 
saw  a  dozen  women  and  children  drowning  themselves  in  a 
small  pond  the  day  after  the  fight."  We  quickly  cap- 
tured the  island  of  Chusan,  on  the  east  coast  of  China ; 
a  part  of  our  squadron  went  up  the  Peiho  River  to  threaten 
the  capital ;  negotiations  were  opened,  and  the  prelimina- 


THE  OPIUM  WAR.  155 

ries  of  a  treaty  were  made  out,  to  which,  however,  neither 
the  English  Government  nor  the  Chinese  would  agree,  and 
the  war  was  reopened.  Chusan  was  again  taken  by  us ; 
Ningpo,  a  large  city  a  few  miles  in  on  the  main-land,  fell 
into  our  hands  ;  Amoy,  farther  south,  was  captured ;  our 
troops  were  before  Nankin  when  the  Chinese  Government 
at  last  saw  how  futile  was  the  idea  of  resisting  our  arms. 
Their  women  or  their  children  might  just  as  well  have 
attempted  to  encounter  our  soldiers.  With  all  the 
bravery  which  the  Chinese  often  displayed,  there  was 
something  pitiful,  pathetic,  ludicrous,  in  the  simple  and 
childlike  attempts  which  they  made  to  carry  on  war 
against  us.  They  made  peace  at  last  on  any  terms  we 
chose  to  ask.  We  asked,  in  the  first  instance,  the  cession 
in  perpetuity  to  us  of  the  island  of  Hong- Kong.  Of  course 
we  got  it.  Then  we  asked  that  five  ports — Canton, 
Amoy,  Foo-Chow-Foo,  Ningpo,  and  Shanghai — should  be 
thrown  open  to  British  traders,  and  that  consuls  should 
be  established  there.  Needless  to  say  that  this,  too,  was 
conceded.  Then  it  was  agreed  that  the  indemnity  already 
mentioned  should  be  paid  by  the  Chinese  Government — 
some  four  millions  and  a  half  sterling,  in  addition  to  one 
million  and  a  quarter  as  compensation  for  the  destroyed 
opium.  It  was  also  stipulated  that  correspondence  be- 
tween officials  of  the  two  Governments  was  thenceforth 
to  be  carried  on  upon  equal  terms.  The  war  was  over  for 
the  present,  and  the  thanks  of  both  Houses  of  Parliament 
were  voted  to  the  fleet  and  army  engaged  in  the  opera- 
tions. The  Duke  of  Wellington  moved  the  vote  of  thanks 
in  the  House  of  Lords.  He  could  hardly  help,  one  would 
think,  forming  in  his  mind  as  he  spoke  an  occasional 
contrast  between  the  services  which  he  asked  the  House 
to  honor,  and  the  sort  of  warfare  which  it  had  been  his 
glorious  duty  to  engage  in  so  long.  The  Duke  of  Wel- 
lington was  a  simple-minded  man,  with  little  sense  of 


156  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

humor.  He  did  not,  probably,  perceive  himself  the  irony 
that  others  might  have  seen  in  the  fact  that  the  conqueror 
of  Napoleon,  the  victor  in  years  of  warfare  against 
soldiers  unsurpassed  in  history,  should  have  had  to  move 
a  vote  of  thanks  to  the  fleet  and  army  which  triumphed 
over  the  unarmed,  helpless,  childlike  Chinese. 

The  whole  chapter  of  history  ended,  not  inappropriately 
perhaps,  with  a  rather  pitiful  dispute  between  the  English 
Government  and  the  English  traders  about  the  amount  of 
compensation  to  which  the  latter  laid  claim  for  their  de- 
stroyed opium.  The  Government  were  in  something  of 
a  difficulty ;  for  they  had  formally  announced  that  they 
were  resolved  to  let  the  traders  abide  by  any  loss  which 
their  violation  of  the  laws  of  China  might  bring  upon  them. 
But,  on  the  other  hand,  they  had  identified  themselves  by 
the  war  with  the  cause  of  the  traders ;  and  one  of  the 
conditions  of  peace  had  been  the  compensation  for  the 
opium.  The  traders  insisted  that  the  amount  given  for 
this  purpose  by  the  Chinese  Government  did  not  nearly 
meet  their  losses.  The  English  Government,  on  the  other 
hand,  would  not  admit  that  they  were  bound  in  any  way 
further  to  make  good  the  losses  of  the  merchants.  The 
traders  demanded  to  be  compensated  according  to  the 
price  of  opium  at  the  time  the  seizure  was  made ;  a  demand 
which,  if  we  admit  any  claim  at  all,  seems  only  fair  and 
reasonable.  The  Government  had  clearly  undertaken 
their  cause  hi  the  end,  and  were  hardly  in  a  position,  either 
logical  or  dignified,  when  they  afterward  chose  to  say, 
"  Yes,  we  admit  that  we  did  undertake  to  get  you  redress, 
but  we  do  not  think  now  that  we  are  bound  to  give  you 
full  redress."  At  last  the  matter  was  compromised ;  the 
merchants  had  to  take  what  they  could  get,  something 
considerably  below  their  demand,  and  give  in  return  to 
the  Government  an  immediate  acquittance  in  full.  It  is 
hard  to  get  up  any  feeling  of  sympathy  with  the  traders 


TIIE  OPIUM  WAR.  157 

who  lost  on  such  a  speculation.  It  is  hard  to  feel  any 
regret,  even  if  the  Government,  which  had  done  so  much 
for  them  in  the  war,  treated  them  so  shabbily  when  the 
war  was  over,  but  that  they  were  treated  shabbily  in  the 
final  settlement  seems  to  us  to  allow  of  no  doubt. 

The  Chinese  war,  then,  was  over  for  the  time.  But  as 
the  children  say  that  snow  brings  more  snow,  so  did  that 
war  with  China  bring  other  wars  to  follow  it. 


158  A  lllSTORY  OF  OUR  O»FJV  TIMES. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

DECLINE  AND  FALL  OP  THE  WHIG  MINISTRY. 

THE  Melbourne  Ministry  kept  going  from  bad  to  worse. 
There  was  a  great  stirring  in  the  country  all  around  them, 
which  made  their  feebleness  the  more  conspicuous.  We 
sometimes  read  in  history  a  defence  of  some  particular 
sovereign  whom  common  opinion  cries  down,  the  defence 
being  a  reference  to  the  number  of  excellent  measures  that 
were  set  in  motion  during  his  reign.  If  we  were  to  judge 
of  the  Melbourne  Ministry  on  the  same  principle,  it  might 
seem,  indeed,  as  if  their  career  was  one  of  extreme  activity 
and  fruitfulness.  Reforms  were  astir  in  almost  every  di- 
rection. Inquiries  into  the  condition  of  our  poor  and  our 
laboring  classes  were,  to  use  a  cant  phrase  of  the  time,  the 
order  of  the  day.  The  foundation  of  the  colony  of  New 
Zealand  was  laid  with  a  philosophical  deliberation  and 
thoughtfulness  which  might  have  reminded  one  of  Locke 
and  the  Constitution  of  the  Carolinas.  Some  of  the  first 
comprehensive  and  practical  measures  to  mitigate  the 
rigor  and  to  correct  the  indiscriminateness  of  the  death 
punishment  were  taken  during  this  period.  One  of  the 
first  legislative  enactments  which  fairly  acknowledged 
the  difference  between  an  English  wife  and  a  purchased 
slave,  so  far  as  the  despotic  power  of  the  master  was 
concerned,  belongs  to  the  same  time.  This  was  the 
Custody  of  Infants  Bill,  the  object  of  which  was  to  obtain 


DECLINE  AND  FALL  OF  THE  WHIG  MINISTRY.     159 

for  mothers  of  irreproachable  conduct,  who  through  no 
fault  of  theirs  were  living  apart  from  their  husbands, 
occasional  access  to  their  children  with  the  permission 
and  under  the  control  of  the  Equity  Judges.  It  is  curious 
to  notice  how  long  and  how  fiercely  this  modest  measure 
of  recognition  for  what  may  almost  be  called  the  natural 
right  of  a  wife  and  a  mother  was  disputed  in  Parliament, 
or  at  least  in  the  House  of  Lords. 

It  is  curious,  too,  to  notice  what  a  clamor  was  raised 
over  the  small  contribution  to  the  cause  of  national  edu- 
cation which  was  made  by  the  Melbourne  Government. 
In  1834,  the  first  grant  of  public  money  for  the  purposes 
of  elementary  education  was  made  by  Parliament.  The 
sum  granted  was  twenty  thousand  pounds,  and  the  same 
grant  was  made  every  year  until  1839.  Then  Lord  John 
Russell  asked  for  an  increase  of  ten  thousand  pounds,  and 
proposed  a  change  in  the  manner  of  appropriating  the 
money.  Up  to  that  time  the  grant  had  been  distributed 
through  the  National  School  Society,  a  body  in  direct  con- 
nection with  the  Church  of  England,  and  the  British  and 
Foreign  School  Association,  which  admitted  children  of  all 
Christian  denominations,  without  imposing  on  them  secta- 
rian teaching.  The  money  was  dispensed  by  the  Lords  of 
the  Treasury,  who  gave  aid  to  applicants  in  proportion  to 
the  size  and  cost  of  the  school  buildings,  and  the  number  of 
children  who  attended  them.  Naturally  the  result  of  such 
an  arrangement  was  that  the  districts  which  needed  help 
the  most  got  it  the  least.  If  a  place  was  so  poor  as  not  to  be 
able  do  to  anything  for  itself,  the  Lords  of  the  Treasury 
would  do  nothing  for  it.  Naturally,  too,  the  rich  and 
powerful  Church  of  England  secured  the  greater  part  of  the 
grant  for  itself.  There  was  no  inspection  of  the  schools ; 
no  reports  were  made  to  Parliament  as  to  the  manner  in 
which  the  system  worked ;  no  steps  were  taken  to  find 
out  if  the  teachers  were  qualified  or  the  teaching  was 


160  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

good.  "  The  statistics  of  the  schools,"  says  a  writer  in 
the  Ediiiburgh  Iteview,  "  were  alone  considered — the  size 
of  the  school-room,  the  cost  of  the  building,  and  the  number 
of  scholars."  In  1839  Lord  John  Russell  proposed  to 
increase  the  grant,  and  an  Order  in  Council  transferred  its 
distribution  to  a  committee  of  the  privy  council,  com- 
posed of  the  president  and  not  more  than  five  members. 
Lord  John  Russell  also  proposed  the  appointment  of  in- 
spectors, the  founding  of  a  model  school  for  the  training 
of  teachers,  and  the  establishment  of  infant  schools.  The 
model  school  and  the  infant  schools  were  to  be  practically 
unsectarian.  The  committee  of  the  privy  council  were  to 
be  allowed  to  depart  from  the  principle  of  proportioning 
their  grants  to  the  amount  of  local  contribution,  to  estab- 
lish in  poor  and  crowded  places  schools  not  necessarily 
connected  with  either  of  the  two  educational  societies, 
and  to  extend  their  aid  even  to  schools  where  the  Roman 
Catholic  version  of  the  Bible  was  read.  The  proposals  of 
the  Government  were  fiercely  opposed  in  both  Houses 
of  Parliament.  The  most  various  and  fantastic  forms  of 
bigotry  combined  against  them.  The  applicaton  of  public 
money,  and  especially  through  the  hands  of  the  committee 
of  privy  council,  to  any  schools  not  under  the  control  and 
authority  of  the  Church  of  England  was  denounced  as  a 
state  recognition  of  popery  and  heresy.  Scarcely  less 
marvellous  to  us  now  are  the  speeches  of  those  who 
promoted  than  of  those  who  opposed  the  scheme.  Lord 
John  Russell  himself,  who  was  much  in  advance  of  the 
common  opinion  of  those  among  whom  he  moved,  pleaded 
for  the  principles  of  his  measure  in  a  tone  rather  of 
apology  than  of  actual  vindication.  He  did  not  venture 
to  oppose  point-blank  the  claim  of  those  who  insisted  that 
it  was  part  of  the  sacred  right  of  the  Established  Church 
to  have  the  teaching  all  done  in  her  own  way  or  to  allow 
no  teaching  at  all. 


DECLINE  AND  FALL  OF  THE  WHIG  MINISTRY.     161 

The  Government  did  not  get  all  they  sought  for.  They 
had  a  fierce  fight  for  their  grant,  and  an  amendment 
moved  by  Lord  Stanley,  to  the  effect  that  her  Majesty 
be  requested  to  revoke  the  Order  in  Council  appointing 
the  Committee  on  Education,  was  only  negatived  by  a 
majority  of  two  votes — 275  to  273.  In  the  Lords,  to  which 
the  struggle  was  transferred,  the  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury actually  moved  and  carried  by  a  large  majority  an 
address  to  the  Queen  praying  her  to  revoke  the  Order  in 
Council.  The  Queen  replied  firmly  that  the  funds  voted 
by  Parliament  would  be  found  to  be  laid  out  in  strict 
accordance  with  constitutional  usage,  the  rights  of  con- 
science, and  the  safety  of  the  Established  Church,  and 
so  dismissed  the  question.  The  Government,  therefore, 
succeeded  in  establishing  their  Committee  of  Council  on 
Education,  the  institution  by  which  our  system  of  pub- 
lic instruction  has  been  managed  ever  since.  The  minis- 
try, on  the  whole,  showed  to  advantage  in  this  struggle. 
They  took  up  a  principle,  and  they  stood  by  it.  If,  as  we 
have  said,  the  speeches  made  by  the  promoters  of  the 
scheme  seem  amazing  to  any  intelligent  person  of  our 
time  because  of  the  feeble,  apologetic,  and  almost  craven 
tone  in  which  they  assert  the  claims  of  a  system  of  na- 
tional education,  yet  it  must  be  admitted  that  the  prin- 
ciple was  accepted  by  the  Government  at  some  risk,  and 
that  it  was  not  shabbily  deserted  in  the  face  of  hostile 
pressure.  It  is  worth  noticing  that  while  the  increased 
grant  and  the  principles  on  which  it  was  to  be  distributed 
were  opposed  by  such  men  as  Sir  Robert  Peel,  Lord 
Stanley,  Mr.  Gladstone,  and  Mr.  Disraeli,  it  had  the  sup- 
port of  Mr.  O'Connell  and  of  Mr.  Smith  O'Brien.  Both 
these  Irish  leaders  only  regretted  that  the  grant  was 
not  very  much  larger,  and  that  it  was  not  appropriated 
on  a  more  liberal  principle.  O'Connell  was  the  recog- 
nized leader  of  the  Irish  Catholics  and  Nationalists ; 

11 


162  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

Smith  O'Brien  was  an  aristocratic  Protestant.  With  all 
the  weakness  of  the  Whig  Ministry,  their  term  of  office 
must  at  least  be  remarkable  for  the  new  departure  it  took 
in  the  matter  of  national  education.  The  appointment  of 
the  Committee  of  Council  marks  an  epoch. 

Indeed,  'the  history  of  that  time  seems  full  of  Reform 
projects.  The  Parliamentary  annals  contain  the  names 
of  various  measures  of  social  and  political  improvement 
which  might  in  themselves,  it  would  seem,  bear  witness 
to  the  most  unsleeping  activity  on  the  part  of  any  minis- 
try. Measures  for  general  registration  ;  for  the  reduction  of 
the  stamp  duty  on  newspapers  ;  and  of  the  duty  on  paper ; 
for  the  improvement  of  the  jail  system ;  for  the  spread  of 
vaccination ;  for  the  regulation  of  the  labor  of  children ;  for 
the  prohibition  of  the  employment  of  any  child  or  young 
person  under  twenty-one  in  the  cleaning  of  chimneys  by 
climbing ;  for  the  suppression  of  the  punishment  of  the 
pillory ;  efforts  to  relieve  the  Jews  from  civil  disabilities — 
these  are  but  a  few  of  the  many  projects  of  social  and  polit- 
ical reform  that  occupied  the  attention  of  that  busy  period, 
which  somehow  appears,  nevertheless,  to  have  been  so 
sleepy  and  do-nothing.  How  does  it  come  about  that  we 
can  regard  the  ministry  hi  whose  time  all  these  things 
were  done  or  attempted  as  exhausted  and  worthless  ? 

One  answer  is  plain.  The  reforming  energy  was  hi  the 
time  and  not  hi  the  ministry.  In  every  instance  public 
opinion  went  far  ahead  of  the  inclinations  of  her  Majesty's 
ministers.  There  was  a  just  and  general  conviction  that 
if  the  Government  were  left  to  themselves  they  would  do 
nothing.  When  they  were  driven  into  any  course  of  im- 
provement they  usually  did  all  they  could  to  minimize 
the  amount  of  reform  to  be  effected.  Whatever  they  un- 
dertook they  seemed  to  undertake  reluctantly,  and  as  if 
only  with  the  object  of  preventing  other  people  from  hav- 
ing anything  to  do  with  it.  Naturally,  therefore,  they 


DECLINE  AND  FALL  OF  THE  WHIG  MINISTRY.     163 

got  little  or  no  thanks  for  any  good  they  might  have 
done.  When  they  brought  in  a  measure  to  abolish  in 
various  cases  the  punishment  of  death,  they  fell  so  far 
behind  public  opinion  and  the  inclinations  of  the  commis- 
sion that  had  for  eight  years  been  inquiring  into  the  state 
of  our  criminal  law,  that  their  bill  only  passed  by  very 
narrow  majorities,  and  impressed  many  ardent  reformers 
as  if  it  were  meant  rather  to  withhold  than  to  advance  a 
genuine  reform.  In  truth,  it  was  a  period  of  enthusiasm 
and  of  growth,  and  the  ministry  did  not  understand  this. 
Lord  Melbourne  seems  to  have  found  it  hard  to  persuade 
himself  that  there  was  any  real  anxiety  in  the  mind  of 
any  one  to  do  anything  in  particular.  He  had,  appar- 
ently, got  into  his  mind  the  conviction  that  the  only  sensi- 
ble thing  the  people  of  England  could  do  was  to  keep  up 
the  Melbourne  Ministry,  and  that,  being  a  sensible  people, 
they  would  naturally  do  this.  He  had  grown  into  some- 
thing like  the  condition  of  a  pampered  old  hall-porter, 
who,  dozing  in  his  chair,  begins  to  look  on  it  as  an  act 
of  rudeness  if  any  visitor  to  his  master  presumes  to  knock 
at  the  door  and  so  disturb  him  from  his  comfortable  rest. 
Any  one  who  doubts  that  it  was  really  a  time  of  en- 
thusiasm in  these  countries  has  only  to  glance  at  its 
history.  The  Church  of  England  and  the  Church  of 
Scotland  were  alike  convulsed  by  movements  which  were 
the  offspring  of  a  genuine  and  irresistible  enthusiasm — 
enthusiasm  of  that  strong,  far-reaching  kind  which  makes 
epochs  in  the  history  of  a  church  or  a  people.  In  Ireland 
Father  Mathew,  a  pious  and  earnest  friar,  who  had  neither 
eloquence  nor  learning  nor  genius,  but  only  enthusiasm 
and  noble  purpose,  had  stirred  the  hearts  of  the  population 
in  the  cause  of  temperance  as  thoroughly  as  Peter  the 
Hermit  might  have  stirred  the  heart  of  a  people  to  a  crusade. 
Many  of  the  efforts  of  social  reform  which  are  still  periodi- 
cally made  among  ourselves  had  their  beginning  then,  and 


164  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

can  scarcely  be  said  to  have  made  much  advance  from  that 
day  to  this.  In  July,  1840,  Mr.  Hume  moved  in  the  House 
of  Commons  for  an  address  to  the  Throne,  pray  ing  that  the 
British  Museum  and  the  National  Gallery  might  be  opened 
to  the  public  after  Divine  service  on  Sundays,  "  at  such 
hours  as  taverns,  beer-shops,  and  gin-shops  are  legally 
open."  The  motion  was,  of  course,  rejected;  but  it  is 
worthy  of  mention  now  as  an  evidence  of  the  point  to 
which  the  spirit  of  social  reform  had  advanced  at  a  period 
when  Lord  Melbourne  had  seemingly  made  up  his  mind 
that  reform  had  done  enough  for  his  generation,  and  that 
ministers  might  be  allowed,  at  least  during  his  time,  to 
eat  their  meals  in  peace  without  being  disturbed  by  the 
urgencies  of  restless  Radicals,  or  threatened  with  hostile 
majorities  and  Tory  successes. 

The  Stockdale  case  was  a  disturbance  of  ministerial 
repose  which  at  one  time  threatened  to  bring  about  a 
collision  between  the  privileges  of  Parliament  and  the 
authority  of  the  law  courts.  The  Messrs.  Hansard,  the 
well-known  Parliamentary  printers,  had  published  certain 
Parliamentary  reports  on  prisons,  in  which  it  happened 
that  a  book  published  by  J.  J.  Stockdale  was  described  as 
obscene  and  disgusting  in  the  extreme.  Stockdale  pro- 
ceeded against  the  Hansards  for  libel.  The  Hansards 
pleaded  the  authority  of  Parliament ;  but  Lord  Chief- 
justice  Denman  decided  that  the  House  of  Commons  was 
not  Parliament,  and  had  no  authority  to  sanction  the 
publication  of  libels  on  individuals.  Out  of  this  contradic- 
tion of  authorities  arose  a  long  and  often  a  very  unseemly 
squabble.  The  House  of  Commons  would  not  give  up  its 
privileges ;  the  law  courts  would  not  admit  its  authority. 
Judgment  was  given  by  default  against  the  Hansards  in 
one  of  the  many  actions  for  libel  which  arose  out  of  the 
affair,  and  the  sheriffs  of  London  were  called  on  to  seize 
end  sell  some  of  the  Hansards'  property  to  satisfy  the 


DECLINE  AND  FALL  OF  THE  WHIG  MINISTRY.    165 

demands  of  the  plaintiff.  The  unhappy  sheriffs  were 
placed,  as  the  homely  old  saying  would  describe  it,  between 
the  devil  and  the  deep  sea.  If  they  touched  the  property 
of  the  Hansards  they  were  acting  in  contempt  of  the  privi- 
lege of  the  House  of  Commons,  and  were  liable  to  be  com- 
mitted to  Newgate.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  they  refused  to 
carry  out  the  orders  of  the  Court  of  Queen's  Bench,  that 
court  would  certainly  send  them  to  prison  for  the  refusal. 
The  reality  of  their  dilemma  was,  in  fact,  very  soon 
proved.  The  amount  of  the  damages  was  paid  into  the 
Sheriffs  Court  in  order  to  avoid  the  scandal  of  a  sale,  but 
under  protest ;  the  House  of  Commons  ordered  the  sheriffs 
to  refund  the  money  to  the  Hansards;  the  Court  of 
Queen's  Bench  was  moved  for  an  order  to  direct  the 
sheriffs  to  pay  it  over  to  Stockdale.  The  sheriffs  were 
finally  committed  to  the  custody  of  the  sergeant-at-arms 
for  contempt  of  the  House  of  Commons.  The  Court  of 
Queen's  Bench  served  a  writ  of  habeas  corpus  on  the 
sergeant-at-arms  calling  on  him  to  produce  the  sheriffs  in 
court.  The  House  directed  the  sergeant-at-arms  to  inform 
the  court  that  he  held  the  sheriffs  in  custody  by  order  of 
the  Commons.  The  sergeant-at-arms  took  the  sheriffs  to 
the  Court  of  Queen's  Bench  and  made  his  statement 
there ;  his  explanation  was  declared  reasonable  and  suffi- 
cient, and  he  marched  his  prisoners  back  again.  A  great 
deal  of  this  ridiculous  sort  of  thing  went  on  which  it  is 
not  now  necessary  to  describe  in  any  detail.  The  House 
of  Commons,  what  with  the  arrest  of  the  sheriffs  and  of 
agents  acting  on  behalf  of  the  pertinacious  Stockdale, 
had  on  their  hands  batches  of  prisoners  with  whom  they 
did  not  know  in  the  least  what  to  do ;  the  whole  affair 
created  immense  popular  excitement  mingled  with  much 
ironical  laughter.  At  last  the  House  of  Commons  had 
recourse  to  legislation,  and  Lord  John  Russell  brought 
in  a  bill  on  March  3d,  1840,  to  afford  summary  protection 


166  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

to  all  persons  employed  in  the  publication  of  Parlia- 
mentary papers.  The  preamble  of  the  measure  declared 
that  "whereas  it  is  essential  to  the  due  and  effectual 
discharge  of  the  functions  and  duties  of  Parliament  that 
no  obstruction  should  exist  to  the  publication  of  the 
reports,  papers,  votes,  or  proceedings  of  either  House,  as 
such  House  should  deem  fit,"  it  is  to  be  lawful  "  for  any 
person  or  persons  against  whom  any  civil  or  criminal 
proceedings  shall  be  taken  on  account  of  such  publication 
to  bring  before  the  court  a  certificate  under  the  hand  of 
the  Lord  Chancellor  or  the  Speaker,  stating  that  it  was 
published  by  the  authority  of  the  House,  and  the  proceed- 
ings should  at  once  be  stayed."  This  bill  was  run  quickly 
through  both  Houses — not  without  some  opposition  or 
at  least  murmur  in  the  Upper  House — and  it  became 
law  on  April  14th.  It  settled  the  question  satisfactorily 
enough,  although  it  certainly  did  not  define  the  relative 
rights  of  Parliament  and  the  courts  of  law.  No  difficulty 
of  the  same  kind  has  since  arisen.  The  sheriffs  and  the 
other  prisoners  were  discharged  from  custody  after  a  while, 
and  the  public  excitement  went  out  in  quiet  laughter. 

The  question,  however,  was  a  very  serious  one ;  and  it 
is  significant  that  public  opinion  was  almost  entirely  on 
the  side  of  the  law  courts  and  the  sheriffs.  The  ministry 
must  have  so  fallen  hi  public  favor  as  to  bring  the  House 
of  Commons  into  disrepute  along  with  them,  or  such  a 
sentiment  could  not  have  prevailed  so  widely  out-of-doors. 
The  public  seemed  to  see  nothing  in  the  whole  affair 
but  a  tyrannical  House  of  Commons  wielding  illimitable 
powers  against  a  few  humble  individuals,  some  of  whom, 
the  sheriffs,  for  instance,  had  no  share  in  the  controversy 
except  that  imposed  on  them  by  official  duty.  Accord- 
ingly, the  sheriffs  were  the  heroes  of  the  hour,  and  were 
toasted  and  applauded  all  over  the  country.  Assuredly 
it  was  an  awkward  position  for  the  House  of  Commons  to 


DECLINE  AND  FALL  OF  THE  WHIG  MINISTRY.     167 

be  placed  in  when  it  had  to  vindicate  its  privileges  by 
committing  to  prison  men  who  were  merely  doing  a  duty 
which  the  law  courts  imposed  on  them.  It  would  have 
been  better,  probably,  if  the  Government  had  more  firmly 
asserted  the  rights  of  the  House  of  Commons  at  the  begin- 
ning, and  thus  allowed  the  public  to  see  the  real  question 
which  the  whole  controversy  involved.  Nothing  can  be 
more  clear  now  than  the  paramount  importance  of  secur- 
ing to  each  House  of  Parliament  an  absolute  authority  and 
freedom  of  publication.  No  evil  that  could  possibly  arise 
out  of  the  misuse  of  such  a  power  could  be  anything  like 
that  certain  to  come  of  a  state  of  things  which  restricted  by 
libel  laws,  or  otherwise,  the  right  of  either  House  to  publish 
whatever  it  thought  proper  for  the  public  good.  Not  a  sin- 
gle measure  for  the  reform  of  any  great  grievance,  from 
the  abolition  of  slavery  to  the  passing  of  the  Factory  Acts, 
but  might  have  been  obstructed,  and  perhaps  even  pre- 
vented, if  the  free  exposure  of  existing  evils  were  denied 
to  the  Houses  of  Parliament.  In  this  country,  Parliament 
only  works  through  the  power  of  public  opinion.  A  social 
reform  is  not  carried  out  simply  by  virtue  of  the  decision 
of  a  cabinet  that  something  ought  to  be  done.  The 
attention  of  the  Legislature  and  of  the  public  has  to  be 
called  to  the  grievance  again  and  again,  by  speeches, 
resolutions,  debates,  and  divisions,  before  there  is  any 
chance  of  carrying  a  measure  on  the  subject.  When 
public  opinion  is  ripe,  and  is  strong  enough  to  help  the 
Government  through  with  a  reform  in  spite  of  prejudices 
and  vested  interests,  then,  and  not  till  then,  the  reform  is 
carried.  But  it  would  be  hardly  possible  to  bring  the 
matter  up  to  this  stage  of  growth  if  those  who  were  inter- 
ested in  upholding  a  grievance  had  the  power  of  worry- 
ing the  publishers  of  the  Parliamentary  reports  by  legal 
proceedings  in  the  earlier  stages  of  the  discussion.  Nor 
would  it  be  of  any  use  to  protect  merely  the  freedom  of 


168  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

debate  in  Parliament  itself.  It  is  not  through  debate,  but 
through  publication,  that  the  public  opinion  of  the  coun- 
try is  reached.  In  truth,  the  poorer  a  man  is,  the  weaker 
and  the  humbler,  the  greater  need  is  there  that  he  should 
call  out  for  the  full  freedom  of  publication  to  be  vested  in 
the  hands  of  Parliament.  The  factory  child,  the  climbing 
boy,  the  apprentice  under  colonial  systems  of  modified 
slavery,  the  seaman  sent  to  sea  in  the  rotten  ship ;  the 
woman  clad  in  unwomanly  rags  who  sings  her  "  Song  of 
a  Shirt ; "  the  other  woman,  almost  literally  unsexed  hi 
form,  function,  and  soul,  who  in  her  filthy  trousers  of 
sacking  dragged  on  all-fours  the  coal  trucks  in  the  mines 
— these  are  the  tyrants  and  the  monopolists  for  whom  we 
assert  the  privilege  of  Parliamentary  publication. 

The  operations  which  took  place  about  this  time  in 
Syria  belong,  perhaps,  rather  to  the  general  history  of  the 
Ottoman  Empire  than  to  that  of  England.  But  they  had 
so  important  a  bearing  on  the  relations  between  this  coun- 
try and  France,  and  are  so  directly  connected  with  sub- 
sequent events  in  which  England  bore  a  leading  part,  that 
it  would  be  impossible  to  pass  them  over  without  some 
notice  here.  Mohammed  Ali,  Pasha  of  Egypt,  the  most 
powerful  of  all  the  Sultan's  feudatories,  a  man  of  iron  will 
and  great  capacity  both  for  war  and  administration,  had 
made  himself  for  a  time  master  of  Syria.  By  the  aid  of 
the  warlike  qualities  of  his  adopted  son,  Ibrahim  Pasha, 
he  had  defeated  the  armies  of  the  Porte  wherever  he  had 
encountered  them.  Mohammed's  victories  had,  for  the 
time,  compelled  the  Porte  to  allow  him  to  remain  hi  power 
in  Syria ;  but  the  Sultan  had  long  been  preparing  to  try 
another  effort  for  the  reduction  of  his  ambitious  vassal. 
In  1839  the  Sultan  again  declared  war  against  Mohammed 
Ali.  Ibrahim  Pasha  again  obtained  an  overwhelming 
victory  over  the  Turkish  army.  The  energetic  Sultan  Mah- 
moud,  a  man  not  unworthy  to  cope  with  such  an  adversary 


DECLINE  AND  FALL  OF  THE  WHIG  MINISTRY.     169 

as  Mohammed  All,  died  suddenly ;  and  immediately  after 
his  death  the  Capitan  Pasha,  or  Lord  High  Admiral  of  the 
Ottoman  fleet,  went  over  to  the  Egyptians  with  all  his 
vessels ;  an  act  of  almost  unexampled  treachery  even  in 
the  history  of  the  Ottoman  Empire.  It  was  evident  that 
Turkey  was  not  able  to  hold  her  own  against  the  formi- 
dable Mohammed  and  his  successful  son ;  and  the  policy 
of  the  "Western  Powers  of  Europe,  and  of  England  especial- 
ly, had  long  been  to  maintain  the  Ottoman  Empire  as  a 
necessary  part  of  the  common  state  system.  The  policy 
of  Russia  was  to  keep  up  that  empire  as  long  as  it  suited 
her  own  purposes  ;  to  take  care  that  no  other  power  got 
anything  out  of  Turkey  ;  and  to  prepare  the  way  for  such 
a  partition  of  the  spoils  of  Turkey  as  would  satisfy  Rus- 
sian interests.  Russia,  therefore,  was  to  be  found  now 
defending  Turkey  and  now  assailing  her.  The  course  taken 
by  Russia  was  seemingly  inconsistent ;  but  it  was  only 
inconsistent  as  the  course  of  a  sailing  ship  may  be 
which  now  tacks  to  this  side  and  now  to  that,  but  has 
a  clear  object  in  view  and  a  port  to  reach  all  the  while. 
England  was  then,  and  for  a  long  time  after,  steadily  bent 
on  preserving  the  Turkish  Empire,  and  in  a  great  measure 
as  a  rampart  against  the  schemes  and  ambitions  imputed 
to  Russia  herself.  France  was  less  firmly  set  on  the 
maintenance  of  Turkey  ;  and  France,  moreover,  had  got  it 
into  her  mind  that  England  had  designs  of  her  own  on 
Egypt.  Austria  was  disposed  to  go  generally  with  Eng- 
land ;  Prussia  was  little  more  than  a  nominal  sharer  in 
the  alliance  that  was  now  tinkered  up.  It  is  evident  that 
such  an  alliance  could  not  be  very  harmonious  or  direct  in 
its  action.  It  was,  however,  effective  enough  to  prove  too 
strong  for  the  Pasha  of  Egypt.  A  fleet  made  up  of  English, 
Austrian,  and  Turkish  vessels  bombarded  Acre ;  an  allied 
army  drove  the  Egyptians  from  several  of  their  strong- 
holds. Ibrahim  Pasha,  with  all  his  courage  and  genius, 


170  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

was  not  equal  to  the  odds  against  which  he  now  saw  him- 
self forced  to  contend.  He  had  to  succumb.  No  one  could 
doubt  that  he  and  his  father  were  incomparably  better 
able  to  give  good  government  and  the  chances  of  develop- 
ment to  Syria  than  the  Porte  had  ever  been.  But  in  this 
instance,  as  in  others,  the  odious  principle  was  upheld  by 
England  and  her  actual  allies  that  the  Turkish  Empire 
must  be  maintained,  at  no  matter  what  cost  of  suffering 
and  degradation  to  its  subject  populations.  Mohammed 
Ali  was  deprived  of  all  his  Asiatic  possessions,  but  was 
secured  in  his  government  of  Egypt.  A  convention  signed 
at  London  on  July  15th,  1840,  arranged  for  the  imposition 
of  those  terms  on  Mohammed  Ali. 

The  convention  was  signed  by  the  representatives  of 
Great  Britain,  Austria,  Prussia,  and  Russia,  on  the  one  part, 
and  of  the  Ottoman  Porte  on  the  other.  The  name  of 
France  was  not  found  there.  France  had  drawn  back  from 
the  alliance,  and  for  some  time  seemed  as  if  she  were  likely 
to  take  arms  against  it.  M.  Thiers  was  then  her  Prime- 
minister  :  he  was  a  man  of  quick  fancy,  restless  and 
ambitious  temperament,  and  what  we  cannot  help  calling 
a  vulgar  spirit  of  national  self-sufficiency — we  are  speak- 
ing now  of  the  Thiers  of  1840,  not  of  the  wise  and  capable 
statesman,  tempered  and  tried  by  the  fire  of  adversity, 
who  reorganized  France  out  of  the  ruin  and  welter  of  1870. 
Thiers  persuaded  himself  and  the  great  majority  of  his 
countrymen  that  England  was  bent  upon  driving  Moham- 
med Ali  out  of  Egypt  as  well  as  out  of  Syria,  and  that 
her  object  was  to  obtain  possession  of  Egypt  for  herself. 
For  some  months  it  seemed  as  if  war  were  inevitable 
between  England  and  France,  although  there  was  not  in 
reality  the  slightest  reason  why  the  two  states  should 
quarrel.  France  was  just  as  far  away  from  any  thought  of 
a  really  disinterested  foreign  policy  as  England.  England, 
on  the  other  hand,  had  not  the  remotest  idea  of  becom- 


DECLINE  AND  FALL  OF  THE  WHIG  MINISTRY.     171 

ing  the  possessor  of  Egypt.  Fortunately  Louis  Philippe 
and  M.  Guizot  were  both  strongly  in  favor  of  peace ; 
M.  Thiers  resigned ;  and  M.  Guizot  became  Minister  for 
Foreign  Affairs,  and  virtually  head  of  the  Government. 
Thiers  defended  his  policy  in  the  French  Chamber  in  a 
scream  of  passionate  and  almost  hysterical  declamation. 
Again  and  again  he  declared  that  his  mind  had  been  made 
up  to  go  to  war  if  England  did  not  at  once  give  way  and 
modify  the  terms  of  the  convention  of  July.  It  cannot 
be  doubted  that  Thiers  carried  with  him  much  of  the 
excited  public  feeling  of  France.  But  the  King  and  M. 
Guizot  were  happily  supported  by  the  majority  in  and 
out  of  the  Chambers ;  and  on  July  13th,  1841,  the  Treaty 
of  London  was  signed  which  provided  for  the  settlement 
of  the  affairs  of  Egypt  on  the  basis  of  the  arrangement 
already  made,  and  which  contained,  moreover,  the  stipula- 
tion, to  be  referred  to  more  than  once  hereafter,  by  which 
the  Sultan  declared  himself  firmly  resolved  to  maintain 
the  ancient  principle  of  his  empire — that  no  foreign  ship 
of  war  was  to  be  admitted  into  the  Dardanelles  and  the 
Bosphorus,  with  the  exception  of  light  vessels  for  which 
a  firman  was  granted. 

The  public  of  this  country  had  taken  but  little  interest 
in  the  controversy  about  Egypt,  at  least  until  it  seemed 
likely  to  involve  England  in  a  war  with  France.  Some 
of  the  episodes  of  the  war  were  indeed  looked  upon  with 
a  certain  satisfaction  by  people  here  at  home.  The 
bravery  of  Charles  Napier,  the  hot-headed,  self-conceited 
commodore,  was  enthusiastically  extolled,  and  his  feats  of 
successful  audacity  were  glorified  as  though  they  had 
shown  the  genius  of  a  Nelson  or  the  clever  resource  of  a 
Cochrane.  Not  many  of  Napier's  admirers  cared  a  rush 
about  the  merits  of  the  quarrel  between  the  Porte  and  the 
Pasha.  Most  of  them  would  have  been  just  as  well  pleased 
if  Napier  had  been  fighting  for  the  Pasha  and  against  the 


172  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

Porte ;  not  a  few  utterly  ignorant  as  to  whether  he  was 
fighting  for  Porte  or  for  Pasha.  Those  who  claimed  to 
be  more  enlightened  had  a  sort  of  general  idea  that  it 
was  in  some  way  essential  to  the  safety  and  glory  of  Eng- 
land that  whenever  Turkey  was  in  trouble  we  should  at 
once  become  her  champions,  tame  her  rebels,  and  conquer 
her  enemies.  Unfounded  as  were  the  suspicions  of 
Frenchmen  about  our  designs  upon  Egypt,  they  can  hardly 
be  called  very  unreasonable.  Even  a  very  cool  and  im- 
partial Frenchman  might  be  led  to  the  conclusion  that 
free  England  would  not  without  some  direct  purpose  of 
her  own  have  pledged  herself  to  the  cause  of  a  base  and 
a  decaying  despotism. 

Steadily,  meanwhile,  did  the  ministry  go  from  bad  to 
worse.  They  had  greatly  damaged  their  character  by  the 
manner  in  which  they  had  again  and  again  put  up  with 
defeat,  and  consented  to  resume  or  retain  office  on  any 
excuse  or  pretext.  They  were  remarkably  bad  adminis- 
trators ;  their  finances  were  wretchedly  managed.  In  later 
times  we  have  come  to  regard  the  Tories  as  especially 
weak  in  the  matter  of  finance.  A  well-managed  revenue 
and  a  comfortable  surplus  are  generally  looked  upon  as  in 
some  way  or  other  the  monopoly  of  a  Liberal  administra- 
tion ;  while  lavish  expenditure,  deficit,  and  increased  taxa- 
tion are  counted  among  the  necessary  accompaniments 
of  a  Tory  Government.  So  nearly  does  public  opinion 
on  both  sides  go  to  accepting  these  conditions,  that  there 
are  many  Tories  who  take  it  rather  as  a  matter  of  pride 
that  their  leaders  are  not  mean  economists,  and  who  regard 
a  free-handed  expenditure  of  the  national  revenue  as 
something  peculiarly  gentlemanlike,  and  in  keeping  with 
the  honorable  traditions  of  a  great  country  party.  But 
this  was  not  the  idea  which  prevailed  in  the  days  of  the 
Melbourne  Ministry.  Then  the  universal  conviction  was 
that  the  "Whigs  were  incapable  of  managing  the  finances. 


DECLINE  AND  FALL  OF  TIIE  WHIG  MINISTRY.    173 

The  budget  of  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  Mr. 
Baring,  showed  a  deficiency  of  nearly  two  millions.  This 
deficiency  he  proposed  to  meet  in  part  by  alteration  in  the 
sugar  duties ;  but  the  House  of  Commons,  after  a  long 
debate,  rejected  his  proposals  by  a  majority  of  thirty-six. 
It  was  then  expected,  of  course,  that  ministers  would 
resign ;  but  they  were  not  yet  willing  to  accept  the  con- 
sequences of  defeat.  They  thought  they  had  another 
stone  in  their  sling.  Lord  John  Russell  had  previously 
given  notice  of  his  intention  to  move  for  a  committee  of 
the  whole  House  to  consider  the  state  of  legislation  with 
regard  to  the  trade  in  corn ;  and  he  now  brought  forward 
an  announcement  of  his  plan,  which  was  to  propose  a 
fixed  duty  of  eight  shillings  per  quarter  on  wheat,  and 
proportionately  diminished  rates  on  rye,  barley,  and  oats. 
Except  for  its  effect  on  the  fortunes  of  the  Melbourne 
Ministry  there  is  not  the  slightest  importance  to  be 
attached  to  this  proposal.  It  was  an  experiment  in  the 
direction  of  the  Free-traders,  who  were  just  beginning 
to  be  powerful,  although  they  were  not  nearly  strong 
enough  yet  to  dictate  the  policy  of  a  government.  We 
shall  have  to  tell  the  story  of  Free- trade  hereafter ;  this 
present  incident  is  no  part  of  the  history  of  a  great  move- 
ment ;  it  is  merely  a  small  party  dodge.  It  deceived  no 
one.  Lord  Melbourne  had  always  spoken  with  the  utter- 
most contempt  of  the  Free-trade  agitation.  With  charac- 
teristic oaths,  he  had  declared  that  of  all  the  mad  things 
he  had  ever  heard  suggested,  Free-trade  was  the  maddest. 
Lord  John  Russell  himself,  although  far  more  enlightened 
than  the  Prime-minister,  had  often  condemned  and 
sneered  at  the  demand  for  Free-trade.  The  conversion 
of  the  ministers  into  the  official  advocates  of  a  moderate 
fixed  duty  was  all  too  sadden  for  the  conscience,  for  the 
very  stomach  of  the  nation.  Public  opinion  would  not 
endure  it.  Nothing  but  harm  came  to  the  Whigs  from 


174  A  IllSTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

the  attempt.  Instead  of  any  new  adherents  or  fresh 
sympathy  being  won  for  them  by  their  proposal,  people 
only  asked,  "Will  nothing,  then,  turn  them  out  of  office? 
Will  they  never  have  done  with  trying  new  tricks  to  keep 
in  place?" 

Sir  Robert  Peel  took,  in  homely  phrase,  the  bull  by  the 
horns.  He  proposed  a  direct  vote  of  want  of  confidence 
— a  resolution  declaring  that  ministers  did  not  possess 
confidence  of  the  House  sufficiently  to  enable  them  to  carry 
through  the  measures  which  they  deemed  of  essential  im- 
portance to  the  public  welfare,  and  that  their  continuance 
hi  office  under  such  circumstances  was  at  variance  with  the 
spirit  of  the  Constitution.  On  June  4th,  1841,  the  division 
was  taken  ;  and  the  vote  of  no-confidence  was  carried  by  a 
majority  of  one.  Even  the  Whigs  could  not  stand  this. 
Lord  Melbourne  at  last  began  to  think  that  things  were 
looking  serious.  Parliament  was  dissolved,  and  the  result 
of  the  general  election  was  that  the  Tories  were  found  to 
have  a  majority  even  greater  than  they  themselves  had 
anticipated.  The  moment  the  new  Parliament  was  as- 
sembled amendments  to  the  address  were  carried  hi  both 
Houses  in  a  sense  hostile  to  the  Government.  Lord  Mel- 
bourne and  his  colleagues  had  to  resign,  and  Sir  Robert 
Peel  was  intrusted  with  the  task  of  forming  an  adminis- 
tration. 

We  have  not  much  more  to  do  with  Lord  Melbourne  in 
this  history.  He  merely  drops  out  of  it.  Between  his  ex- 
pulsion from  office  and  his  death,  which  took  place  hi  1848, 
he  did  little  or  nothing  to  call  for  the  notice  of  any  one. 
It  was  said  at  one  time  that  his  closing  years  were  lone- 
some and  melancholy ;  but  this  has  lately  been  denied, 
and  indeed  it  is  not  likely  that  one  who  had  such  a  genial 
temper  and  so  many  friends  could  have  been  left  to  the 
dreariness  of  a  not  self-sufficing  solitude  and  to  the  bitter- 
ness of  neglect.  He  was  a  generous  and  kindly  man ;  his 


DECLINE  AND  FALL  OF  TUE  WHIG  MINISTRY.     175 

personal  character,  although  often  assailed,  was  free  of 
any  serious  reproach ;  he  was  a  failure  in  office,  not  so 
much  from  want  of  ability,  as  because  he  was  a  politician 
without  convictions. 

The  Peel  Ministry  came  into  power  with  great  hopes. 
It  had  Lord  Lyndhurst  for  Lord  Chancellor ;  Sir  James 
Graham  for  Home  Secretary ;  Lord  Aberdeen  at  the  For- 
eign Office;  Lord  Stanley  was  Colonial  Secretary.  The 
most  remarkable  man  not  in  the  cabinet,  soon  to  be  one 
of  the  foremost  statesmen  in  the  country,  was  Mr.  W.  E. 
Gladstone.  It  is  a  fact  of  some  significance  in  the  history 
of  the  Peel  administration,  that  the  elections  which 
brought  the  new  ministry  into  power  brought  Mr.  Cobden 
for  the  first  tune  into  the  House  of  Commons. 


170  A  IIISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 


CHAPTER  X. 

MOVEMENTS   IN   THE   CHUBCHE8. 

WHILE  Lord  Melbourne  and  his  Whig  colleagues,  still 
hi  office,  were  fribbling  away  their  popularity  on  the 
pleasant  assumption  that  nobody  was  particularly  hi 
earnest  about  anything,  the  Vice-chancellor  and  heads  of 
houses  held  a  meeting  at  Oxford,  and  passed  a  censure  on 
the  celebrated  "  No.  90,"  of  "  Tracts  for  the  Times."  The 
movement,  of  which  some  important  tendencies  were  for- 
mally censured  in  the  condemnation  of  this  tract,  was  one 
of  the  most  momentous  that  had  stirred  the  Church  of 
England  since  the  Reformation.  The  author  of  the  tract 
was  Dr.  John  Henry  Newman,  and  the  principal  ground 
for  its  censure,  by  voices  claiming  authority,  was  the 
principle  it  seemed  to  put  forward — that  a  man  might 
honestly  subscribe  all  the  articles  and  formularies  of  the 
English  Church,  while  yet  holding  many  of  the  doctrines 
of  the  Church  of  Rome,  against  which  those  articles  were 
regarded  as  a  necessary  protest.  The  great  movement 
which  was  thus  brought  into  sudden  question  and  pub- 
licity was  in  itself  an  offspring  of  the  immense  stirring  of 
thought  which  the  French  Revolution  called  up,  and 
which  had  its  softened  echo  hi  the  English  Reform  Bill. 
The  centre  of  the  religious  movement  was  to  be  found  hi 
the  University  of  Oxford.  When  it  is  in  the  right,  and 
when  it  is  hi  the  wrong,  Oxford  has  always  had  more  of 
the  sentimental  and  of  the  poetic  in  its  cast  of  thought 
than  its  rival  or  colleague  of  Cambridge.  There  were  two 


MOVEMENTS  IN  THE  CHURCHES.  177 

influences  then  in  operation  over  England,  both  of  which 
alike  aroused  the  alarm  and  the  hostility  of  certain  gifted 
and  enthusiastic  young  Oxford  men.  One  was  the  ten- 
dency to  Rationalism  drawn  from  the  German  theologians ; 
the  other  was  the  manner  in  which  the  connection  of  the 
Church  with  the  State  in  England  was  beginning  to 
operate  to  the  disadvantage  of  the  Church  as  a  sacred 
institution  and  teacher.  The  Reform  party  everywhere 
were  assailing  the  rights  and  property  of  the  Church.  In 
Ireland,  especially,  experiments  were  made  which  every 
practical  man  will  now  regard  with  approval,  whether  he 
be  Churchman  or  not,  but  which  seemed  to  the  devoted 
ecclesiast  of  Oxford  to  be  fraught  with  danger  to  the  free- 
dom and  influence  of  the  Church.  Out  of  the  contempla- 
tion of  these  dangers  sprang  the  desire  to  revive  the 
authority  of  the  Church;  to  quicken  her  with  a  new 
vitality ;  to  give  her  once  again  that  place  as  guide  and 
inspirer  of  the  national  life  which  her  ardent  votaries 
believed  to  be  hers  by  right,  and  to  have  been  forfeited 
only  by  the  carelessness  of  her  authorities,  and  their 
failure  to  fulfil  the  duties  of  her  Heaven-assigned  mission. 
No  movement  could  well  have  had  a  purer  source. 
None  could  have  had  more  disinterested  and  high-minded 
promoters.  It  was  borne  in  upon  some  earnest,  unresting, 
souls,  like  that  of  the  sweet  and  saintly  Keble — souls 
"  without  haste  and  without  rest,"  like  Goethe's  star — that 
the  Church  of  England  had  higher  duties  and  nobler 
claims  than  the  business  of  preaching  harmless  sermons 
and  the  power  of  enriching  bishops.  Keble  could  not  bear 
to  think  of  the  Church  taking  pleasure  since  all  is  well. 
He  urged  on  some  of  the  more  vigorous  and  thoughtful 
minds  around  him,  or  rather  he  suggested  it  by  his  influ- 
ence and  his  example,  that  they  should  reclaim  for  the 
Church  the  place  which  ought  to  be  hers,  as  the  true  suc- 
cessor of  the  Apostles.  He  claimed  for  her  that  she,  and 

12 


178  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

she  alone,  was  the  real  Catholic  Church,  and  that  Rome 
had  wandered  away  from  the  right  path,  and  foregone 
the  glorious  mission  which  she  might  have  maintained. 
Among  those  who  shared  the  spirit  and  purpose  of  Keble 
were  Richard  Hurrell  Froude,  the  historian's  elder  brother, 
who  gave  rich  promise  of  a  splendid  career,  but  who  died 
while  still  in  comparative  youth  ;  Dr.  Pusey,  afterward 
leader  of  the  school  of  ecclesiasticism  which  bears  his 
name ;  and,  most  eminent  of  all,  Dr.  Newman.  Keble 
had  taken  part  in  the  publication  of  a  series  of  treatises 
called  "  Tracts  for  the  Times,"  the  object  of  which  was  to 
vindicate  the  real  mission,  as  the  writers  believed,  of  the 
Church  of  England.  This  was  the  Tractarian  movement, 
which  had  such  various  and  memorable  results.  Newman 
first  started  the  project  of  the  Tracts,  and  wrote  the  most 
remarkable  of  them.  He  had,  up  to  this  time,  been  dis- 
tinguished as  one  of  the  most  unsparing  enemies  of  Rome. 
At  the  same  time  he  was,  as  he  has  himself  said,  "  fierce  " 
against  the  "  instruments  "  and  the  "  manifestations  "  of 
"  the  Liberal  cause."  While  he  was  at  Algiers  once,  a 
French  vessel  put  in  there,  flying  the  tricolor ;  Newman 
would  not  even  look  at  her.  "On  my  return,  though 
forced  to  stop  twenty-four  hours  at  Paris,  I  kept  in-doors 
the  whole  time,  and  all  that  I  saw  of  that  beautiful  city 
was  what  I  saw  from  the  diligence."  He  had  never  had 
any  manner  of  association  with  Roman  Catholics ;  had, 
in  fact,  known  singularly  little  of  them.  As  Newman 
studied  and  wrote  concerning  the  best  way  to  restore  the 
Church  of  England  to  her  proper  place  in  the  national 
life,  he  kept  the  thought  before  him  "that  there  was 
something  greater  than  the  Established  Church,  and  that 
that  was  the  Church  Catholic  and  Apostolic,  set  up  from 
the  beginning,  of  which  she  was  but  the  local  presence 
and  the  organ.  She  was  nothing  unless  she  was  this. 
She  must  be  dealt  with  strongly,  or  she  would  be  lost 


MOVEMENTS  IN  THE  CHURCHES.  179 

There  was  need  of  a  second  Reformation."  At  this  time 
the  idea  of  leaving  the  Church  never,  Dr.  Newman  him- 
self assures  us,  had  crossed  his  imagination.  He  felt 
alarmed  for  the  Church  between  German  Rationalism 
and  man-of-the- world  liberalism.  His  fear  was  that  the 
Church  would  sink  to  be  the  servile  instrument  of  a 
State,  and  a  Liberal  State. 

The  abilities  of  Dr.  Newman  were  hardly  surpassed  by 
any  contemporary  in  any  department  of  thought.  His 
position  and  influence  in  Oxford  were  almost  unique.  There 
was  in  his  intellectual  temperament  a  curious  combination 
of  the  mystic  and  the  logical.  He  was  at  once  a  poetic 
dreamer  and  a  sophist — in  the  true  and  not  the  corrupt 
and  ungenerous  sense  of  the  latter  word.  It  had  often 
been  said  of  him  and  of  another  great  Englishman,  that 
a  change  in  their  early  conditions  and  training  would  easily 
have  made  of  Newman  a  Stuart  Mill,  and  of  Mill  a  New- 
man. England,  in  our  time,  has  hardly  had  a  greater 
master  of  argument  and  of  English  prose  than  Newman. 
He  is  one  of  the  keenest  of  dialecticians  ;  and,  like  Mill, 
has  the  rare  art  that  dissolves  all  the  difficulties  of  the 
most  abstruse  or  perplexed  subject,  and  shows  it  bare 
and  clear  even  to  the  least  subtle  of  readers.  His  words 
dispel  mists  ;  and  whether  they  who  listen  agree  or  not, 
they  cannot  fail  to  understand.  A  penetrating,  poignant, 
satirical  humor  is  found  in  most  of  his  writings,  an  irony 
sometimes  piercing  suddenly  through  it  like  a  darting 
pain.  On  the  other  hand,  a  generous  vein  of  poetry  and 
of  pathos  informs  his  style ;  and  there  are  many  passages 
of  his  works  in  which  he  rises  to  the  height  of  a  genuine 
and  noble  eloquence. 

In  all  the  arts  that  make  a  great  preacher  or  orator 
Newman  was  strikingly  deficient.  His  manner  was  con- 
strained, ungraceful,  and  even  awkward ;  his  voice  was 
thin  and  weak.  His  bearing  was  not  at  first  impressive 


180  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

in  any  way.  A  gaunt,  emaciated  figure,  a  sharp  and  eagle 
face,  a  cold,  meditative  eye,  rather  repelled  than  attracted 
those  who  saw  him  for  the  first  time.  Singularly  devoid 
of  affectation,  Newman  did  not  always  conceal  his  intel- 
lectual scorn  of  men  who  made  loud  pretence  with  inferior 
gifts,  and  the  men  must  have  been  few  indeed  whose 
gifts  were  not  inferior  to  his.  Newman  had  no  scorn  for 
intellectual  inferiority  in  itself ;  he  despised  it  only  when 
it  gave  itself  airs.  His  influence  while  he  was  the  vicar 
at  St.  Mary's  at  Oxford  was  profound.  As  Mr.  Gladstone 
said  of  him  in  a  recent  speech,  "  without  ostentation  or 
effort,  but  by  simple  excellence,  he  was  continually  drawing 
undergraduates  more  and  more  around  him."  Mr.  Glad- 
stone in  the  same  speech  gave  a  description  of  Dr.  New- 
man's pulpit  style  which  is  interesting :  "  Dr.  Newman's 
manner  in  the  pulpit  was  one  which,  if  you  considered  it 
in  its  separate  parts,  would  lead  you  to  arrive  at  very 
unsatisfactory  conclusions.  There  was  not  very  much 
change  in  the  inflection  of  the  voice ;  action  there  was 
none ;  his  sermons  were  read,  and  his  eyes  were  always 
on  his  book ;  and  all  that,  you  will  say,  is  against  efficiency 
in  preaching.  Yes ;  but  you  take  the  man  as  a  whole, 
and  there  was  a  stamp  and  a  seal  upon  him,  there  was  a 
solemn  music  and  sweetness  in  his  tone,  there  was  a  com- 
pleteness in  the  figure,  taken  together  with  the  tone  and 
with  the  manner,  which  made  even  his  delivery,  such  as 
I  have  described  it,  and  though  exclusively  with  written 
sermons,  singularly  attractive."  The  stamp  and  seal  were, 
indeed,  those  which  are  impressed  by  genius,  piety,  and 
earnestness.  No  opponent  ever  spoke  of  Newman  but 
with  admiration  for  his  intellect  and  respect  for  his  char- 
acter. Dr.  Newman  had  a  younger  brother,  Francis  W. 
Newman,  who  also  possessed  remarkable  ability  and 
earnestness.  He,  too,  was  distinguished  at  Oxford,  and 
seemed  to  have  a  great  career  there  before  him.  But  he 


MOVEMENTS  IN  THE  CHURCHES.  181 

was  drawn  one  way  by  the  wave  of  thought  before  his  more 
famous  brother  had  been  drawn  the  other  way.  In  1830 
the  younger  Newman  found  himself  prevented  by  religious 
scruples  from  subscribing  the  Thirty-nine  Articles  for  his 
master's  degree.  He  left  the  unversity,  and  wandered 
for  years  in  the  East,  endeavoring,  not  very  successfully, 
perhaps,  to  teach  Christianity  on  its  broadest  base  to 
Mohammedans ;  and  then  he  came  back  to  England  to 
take  his  place  among  the  leaders  of  a  certain  school  of 
free  thought.  Fate  had  dealt  with  those  brothers  as  with 
the  two  friends  in  Richter's  story :  "  it  seized  their  bleed- 
ing hearts,  and  flung  them  different  ways." 

When  Dr.  Newman  wrote  the  famous  Tract  "  No.  90," 
for  which  he  was  censured,  he  bowed  to  the  authority  of 
his  bishop,  if  not  to  that  of  the  heads  of  houses  ;  and  he 
discontinued  the  publication  of  such  treatises.  But  he 
did  not  admit  any  change  of  opinion  ;  and,  indeed,  soon 
after  he  edited  a  publication  called  The  British  Critic,  in 
which  many  of  the  principles  held  to  be  exclusively  those 
of  the  Church  of  Rome  were  enthusiastically  claimed  for 
the  English  Church.  Yet  a  little  and  the  gradual  work- 
ing of  Newman's  mind  became  evident  to  all  the  world. 
The  brightest  and  most  penetrating  intellect  in  the  Church 
of  England  was  withdrawn  from  her  service,  and  New- 
man went  over  to  the  Church  of  Rome.  His  secession 
was  described  by  Mr.  Disraeli,  a  quarter  of  a  century 
afterward,  as  having  "  dealt  a  blow  to  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land under  which  she  still  reels."  To  this  result  had  the 
inquiry  conducted  him  which  had  led  his  friend  Dr.  Pusey 
merely  to  endeavor  to  incorporate  some  of  the  mysticism 
and  the  symbols  of  Rome  with  the  ritual  of  the  English 
Protestant  Church ;  which  had  brought  Keble  only  to  seek 
a  more  liberal  and  truly  Christian  temper  for  the  faith  of 
the  Protestant;  and  which  had  sent  Francis  Newman 
into  Radicalism  and  Rationalism. 


182  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

In  truth,  it  is  not  difficult  now  to  understand  how  the 
elder  Newman's  mind  became  drawn  toward  the  ancient 
Church  which  won  him  at  last.  We  can  see  from  his  own 
candid  account  of  his  earlier  sentiments  how  profoundly 
mystical  was  his  intellectual  nature,  and  how,  long  before 
he  was  conscious  of  any  such  tendency,  he  was  drawn 
toward  the  very  symbolisms  of  the  Catholic  Church.  Pas- 
cal's early  and  unexplained  mastery  of  mathematical  prob- 
lems which  no  one  had  taught  him  is  not  more  suggestive 
hi  its  way  than  those  early  drawings  of  Catholic  symbols 
and  devices  which,  done  in  his  childhood,  Newman  says 
surprised  and  were  inexplicable  to  him  when  he  came  on 
them  in  years  long  after.  No  place  could  be  better  fitted 
to  encourage  and  develop  this  tendency  to  mysticism 
in  a  thoughtful  mind  than  Oxford,  with  all  its  noble 
memories  of  scholars  and  of  priests,  with  its  picturesque 
and  poetic  surroundings,  and  its  never-fading  mediaevalism. 
Newman  lived  in  the  past.  His  spirit  was  with  mediaeval 
England.  His  thoughts  were  of  a  time  when  one  Church 
took  charge  of  the  souls  of  a  whole,  united,  devout  people, 
and  stood  as  the  guide  and  authority  appointed  for  them 
by  Heaven.  He  thought  of  such  a  time  until  first  he 
believed  in  it  as  a  thing  of  the  past,  and  next  came  to  have 
faith  in  the  possibility  of  its  restoration  as  a  thing  of  the 
present  and  the  future.  When  once  he  had  come  to  this 
point  the  rest  followed, "  as  by  lot  God  wot."  No  creature 
could  for  a  moment  suppose  that  that  ideal  Church  was  to 
be  found  in  the  English  Establishment,  submitted  as  it  was 
to  state-made  doctrine,  and  to  the  decision  of  the  Lord 
Chancellor,  who  might  be  an  infidel  or  a  free-liver.  The 
question  which  Cardinal  Manning  tells  us  he  asked  himself 
years  after,  at  the  time  of  the  Gorham  case,  must  often  have 
presented  itself  to  the  mind  of  Newman — Suppose  all 
the  Bishops  of  the  Church  of  England  should  decide 
unanimously  on  any  question  of  doctrine,  would  any  one 


MOVEMENTS  IN  THE  CHURCHES.  183 

receive  the  decision  as  infallible  ?  Of  course  not.  Such 
is  not  the  genius  or  the  principle  of  the  English  Church. 
The  Church  of  England  has  no  pretension  to  be  considered 
the  infallible  guide  of  the  people  in  matters  even  of  doc- 
trine. Were  she  seriously  to  put  forward  any  such  pre- 
tension, it  would  be  rejected  with  contempt  by  the  common 
mind  of  the  nation.  We  are  not  discussing  questions  of 
dogma  or  the  rivals  claims  of  Churches  here;  we  are 
merely  pointing  out  that  to  a  man  with  Newman's  idea 
of  a  church,  the  Church  of  England  could  not  long  afford 
a  home.  That  very  logical  tendency,  which  in  the  mind 
of  Newman,  as  of  that  of  Pascal,  contended  for  supremacy 
with  the  tendency  to  devotion  and  mysticism,  only  im- 
pelled him  more  rigorously  on  his  way.  He  could  not  put 
up  with  compromises,  and  convince  himself  that  he  ought 
to  be  convinced.  He  dragged  every  compromise  and 
every  doctrine  into  the  light,  and  insisted  on  knowing 
exactly  what  it  amounted  to  and  what  it  meant  to  say. 
The  doctrines  and  compromises  of  his  own  Church  did  not 
satisfy  him.  There  are  minds  which,  in  this  condition  of 
bewilderment,  might  have  been  content  to  find  "  110  foot- 
ing so  solid  as  doubt."  Newman  had  not  a  mind  of  that 
class.  He  could  not  believe  in  a  world  without  a  church, 
or  a  church  without  what  he  held  to  be  inspiration ;  and 
accordingly  he  threw  his  whole  soul,  energy,  genius,  and 
fame  into  the  cause  of  the  Church  of  Rome. 

This,  however,  did  not  come  all  at  once.  We  are  antici- 
pating by  a  few  years  the  passing  over  of  Dr.  Newman, 
Cardinal  Manning,  and  others  to  the  ancient  Church.  It 
is  clear  that  Newman  was  not  himself  conscious  for  a 
long  time  of  the  manner  in  which  he  was  being  drawn, 
surely  although  not  quickly,  in  the  direction  of  Rome.  He 
used  to  be  accused  at  one  time  of  having  remained  a  con- 
scious Roman  Catholic  in  the  English  Church,  laboring  to 
make  new  converts.  Apart  from  his  own  calm  assurances, 


184  A  1IISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

and  from  the  singularly  pure  and  candid  nature  of  the 
man,  there  are  reasons  enough  to  render  such  a  charge 
absurd.  Indeed,  that  simple  and  childish  conception  of 
human  nature  which  assumes  that  a  man  must  always 
see  the  logical  consequences  of  certain  admissions  or 
inquiries  beforehand,  because  all  men  can  see  them  after- 
ward, is  rather  confusing  and  out  of  place  when  we  are 
considering  such  a  crisis  of  thought  and  feeling  as  that 
which  took  place  in  Oxford,  and  such  men  as  those  who 
were  principally  concerned  in  it.  For  the  present  it  is 
enough  to  say  that  the  object  of  that  movement  was  to 
raise  the  Church  of  England  from  apathy,  from  dull,  easy- 
going acquiescence,  from  the  perfunctory  discharge  of 
formal  duties,  and  to  quicken  her  again  with  the  spirit  of 
a  priesthood,  to  arouse  her  to  the  living  work,  spiritual 
and  physical,  of  an  ecclesiastical  sovereignty.  The  im- 
pulse overshot  itself  in  some  cases,  and  was  misdirected 
in  others.  It  proved  a  failure,  on  the  whole,  as  to  its 
definite  aims ;  and  it  sometimes  left  behind  it  only  the 
ashes  of  a  barren  symbolism.  But  in  its  source  it  was 
generous,  beneficent,  and  noble,  and  it  is  hard  to  believe 
that  there  has  not  been  throughout  the  Church  of  England, 
on  the  whole,  a  higher  spirit  at  work  since  the  famous 
Oxford  movement  began. 

Still  greater  was  the  practical  importance,  at  least  in 
defined  results,  of  the  movement  which  went  on  in  Scot- 
land about  the  same  time.  A  fortnight  before  the  deci- 
sion of  the  heads  of  houses  at  Oxford  on  Dr.  Newman's 
tract,  Lord  Aberdeen  announced  in  the  House  of  Lords 
that  he  did  not  see  his  way  to  do  anything  in  particular 
with  regard  to  the  dissensions  in  the  Church  of  Scotland. 
He  had  tried  a  measure  he  said,  the  year  before,  and  half 
the  Church  of  Scotland  liked  it,  and  the  other  half  de- 
nounced it,  and  the  Government  opposed  it ;  and  he,  there- 
fore, had  nothing  further  to  suggest  in  the  matter.  The 


MOVEMENTS  IN  THE  CHURCHES.  185 

perplexity  of  Lord  Aberdeen  only  faintly  typified  the  per- 
plexity of  the  ministry.  Lord  Melbourne  was  about  the 
last  man  in  the  world  likely  to  have  any  sympathy  with 
the  spirit  which  animated  the  Scottish  Reformers,  or  any 
notion  of  how  to  get  out  of  the  difficulty  which  the  whole 
question  presented.  Differing  as  they  did  in  so  many 
other  points,  there  was  one  central  resemblance  between 
the  movement  in  the  Kirk  of  Scotland  and  that  which  was 
going  on  in  the  Church  of  England.  In  both  cases  alike 
the  effort  of  the  reforming  party  was  to  emancipate  the 
Church  from  the  control  of  the  State  in  matters  involving 
religious  doctrine  and  duty.  In  Scotland  was  soon  to  be 
presented  the  spectacle  of  a  great  secession  from  an  Es- 
tablished Church,  not  because  the  seceders  objected  to  the 
principle  of  a  Church,  but  because  they  held  that  the 
Establishment  was  not  faithful  enough  to  its  mission  as  a 
Church.  One  of  the  seceders  pithily  explained  the  posi- 
tion of  the  controversy  when  he  said  that  he  and  his  fel- 
lows were  leaving  the  Kirk  of  Scotland,  not  because  she 
was  too  "  churchy,"  but  because  she  was  not  "  churchy  " 
enough. 

The  case  was  briefly  this :  During  the  reign  of 
Queen  Anne  an  Act  was  passed  which  took  from  the 
Church  courts  in  Scotland  the  free  choice  as  to  the  ap- 
pointment of  pastors,  by  subjecting  the  power  of  the  pres- 
bytery to  the  control  and  interference  of  the  law  courts. 
Harley,  Bolingbroke,  and  Swift,  not  one  of  whom  cared 
a  rush  about  the  supposed  sanctity  of  an  ecclesiastical 
appointment,  were  the  authors  of  this  compromise, 
which  was  exactly  of  the  kind  that  sensible  men  of  the 
world  everywhere  might  be  supposed  likely  to  accept  and 
approve.  In  an  immense  number  of  Scotch  parishes  the 
minister  was  nominated  by  a  lay  patron ;  and  if  the  pres- 
bytery found  nothing  to  condemn  in  him  as  to  "life, 
literature,  and  doctrine,"  they  were  compelled  to  appoint 


186  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

him,  however  unwelcome  he  might  be  to  the  parishioners. 
Now  it  is  obvious  that  a  man  might  have  a  blameless 
character,  sound  religious  views,  and  an  excellent  educa- 
tion, and  nevertheless  be  totally  unfitted  to  undertake 
the  charge  of  a  Scottish  parish.  The  Southwark  congre- 
gation, who  appreciate  and  delight  in  the  ministrations 
of  Mr.  Spurgeon,  might  very  well  be  excused  if  they 
objected  to  having  a  perfectly  moral  Charles  Honeyman, 
even  though  his  religious  opinions  were  identical  with 
those  of  their  favorite,  forced  upon  them  at  the  will  of 
some  aristocratic  lay  patron.  The  effect  of  the  power 
conferred  on  the  law  courts  and  the  patron  was  simply 
in  a  great  number  of  cases  to  send  families  away  from 
the  Church  of  Scotland  and  into  voluntaryism.  The 
Scotch  people  are  above  all  others  impatient  of  any 
attempt  to  force  on  them  the  services  of  unacceptable  min- 
isters. Men  clung  to  the  National  Church  as  long  as  it 
was  natural — that  is,  as  long  as  it  represented  and  pro- 
tected the  sacred  claims  of  a  deeply  religious  people.  Dis- 
sent, or  rather  voluntaryism,  began  to  make  a  progress 
in  Scotland  that  alarmed  thoughtful  Churchmen.  To  get 
over  the  difficulty,  the  General  Assembly,  the  highest 
ecclesiastical  court  in  Scotland,  and  likewise  a  sort  of 
Church  Parliament,  declared  that  a  veto  on  the  nomina- 
tion of  the  pastor  should  be  exercised  by  the  congrega- 
tion, in  accordance  with  a  fundamental  law  of  the  Church 
that  no  pastor  should  be  intruded  on  any  congregation 
contrary  to  the  will  of  the  people.  The  Veto  Act,  as  this 
declaration  was  called,  worked  well  enough  for  a  short 
time,  and  the  highest  legal  authorities  declared  it  not 
incompatible  with  the  Act  of  Queen  Anne.  But  it  dimin- 
ished far  too  seriously  the  power  of  the  lay  patron  to  be 
accepted  without  a  struggle.  In  the  celebrated  Auchter- 
arder  case  the  patron  won  a  victory  over  the  Church  hi 
the  courts  of  law,  for  having  presented  a  minister  whose 


MOVEMENTS  IN  THE  CHURCHES.  187 

appointment  was  vetoed  by  the  congregation ;  he  obtained 
an  order  from  the  civil  courts  deciding  that  the  presby- 
tery must  take  him  on  trial,  in  obedience  with  the  Act  of 
Queen  Anne,  as  he  was  qualified  by  life,  literature,  and 
doctrine.  This  question,  however,  was  easily  settled  by 
the  General  Assembly  of  the  Church.  They  left  to  the 
patron's  nominee  his  stipend  and  his  house,  and  took  no 
further  notice  of  him.  They  did  not  recognize  him  as  one 
of  their  pastors,  but  he  might  have,  if  he  would,  the 
manse  and  the  money  which  the  civil  courts  had  declared 
to  be  his.  They  merely  appealed  to  the  Legislature  to 
do  something  which  might  make  the  civil  law  in  harmony 
with  the  principles  of  the  Church.  A  more  serious  ques- 
tion, however,  presently  arose.  This  was  the  famous 
Strathbogie  case,  which  brought  the  authority  of  the 
Church  and  that  of  the  State  into  irreconcilable  conflict. 
A  minister  had  been  nominated  in  the  parish  of  Marnoch 
who  was  so  unacceptable  to  the  congregation  that  261  out 
of  300  heads  of  families  objected  to  his  appointment.  The 
General  Assembly  directed  the  presbytery  of  Strathbogie, 
in  which  the  parish  lay,  to  reject  the  minister,  Mr.  Ed- 
wards. The  presbytery  had  long  been  noted  for  its  lean- 
ing toward  the  claims  of  the  civil  power,  and  it  very 
reluctantly  obeyed  the  command  of  the  highest  authority 
and  ruling  body  of  the  Church.  Another  minister  was 
appointed  to  the  parish.  Mr.  Edwards  fought  the  ques- 
tion out  in  the  civil  court  and  obtained  an  interdict 
against  the  new  appointment,  and  a  decision  that  the 
presbytery  were  bound  to  take  himself  on  trial.  Seven 
members,  constituting  the  majority  of  the  presbytery, 
determined,  without  consulting  the  General  Assembly,  to 
obey  the  civil  power,  and  they  admitted  Mr.  Edwards  on 
trial.  The  seven  were  brought  before  the  bar  of  the  Gen- 
eral Assembly,  and  by  an  overwhelming  majority  were 
condemned  to  be  deposed  from  their  places  in  the  minis- 


188  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

try.  Their  parishes  were  declared  vacant.  A  more  com- 
plete antagonism  between  Church  and  State  is  not  pos- 
sible to  imagine.  The  Church  expelled  from  its  ministry 
seven  men  for  having  obeyed  the  command  of  the  civil 
laws. 

It  was  on  the  motion  of  Dr.  Chalmers  that  the  seven 
ministers  were  deposed.  Dr.  Chalmers  became  the  leader 
of  the  movement  which  was  destined  within  two  years 
from  the  time  we  are  now  surveying  to  cause  the  disrup- 
tion of  the  ancient  Kirk  of  Scotland.  No  man  could  be 
better  fitted  for  the  task  of  leadership  in  such  a  move- 
ment. He  was  beyond  comparison  the  foremost  man  in 
the  Scottish  Church.  He  was  the  greatest  pulpit  orator 
in  Scotland,  or,  indeed,  in  Great  Britain.  As  a  scientific 
writer,  both  on  astronomy  and  on  political  economy,  he 
had  made  a  great  mark.  From  having  been  in  his  earlier 
days  the  minister  of  an  obscure  Scottish  village  congre- 
gation, he  had  suddenly  sprung  into  fame.  He  was  the 
lion  of  any  city  which  he  happened  to  visit.  If  he 
preached  in  London,  the  church  was  crowded  with  the 
leaders  of  politics,  science,  and  fashion,  eager  to  hear  him. 
The  effect  he  produced  in  England  is  all  the  more  surpris- 
ing seeing  that  he  spoke  in  the  broadest  Scottish  accent 
conceivable,  and,  as  one  admirer  admits,  mispronounced 
almost  every  word.  We  have  already  quoted  what  Mr. 
Gladstone  said  about  the  style  of  Dr.  Newman ;  let  us 
cite  also  what  he  says  about  Dr.  Chalmers.  "  I  have 
heard,"  said  Mr.  Gladstone,  "  Dr.  Chalmers  preach  and 
lecture.  Being  a  man  of  Scotch  blood,  I  am  very  much 
attached  to  Scotland,  and  like  even  the  Scotch  accent,  but 
not  the  Scotch  accent  of  Dr.  Chalmers.  Undoubtedly 
the  accent  of  Dr.  Chalmers  in  preaching  and  delivery  was 
a  considerable  impediment  to  his  success ;  but  notwith- 
standing all  that,  it  was  overborne  by  the  power  of  the 
man  hi  preaching — overborne  by  his  power,  which  melted 


MOVEMENTS  IN  THE  CHURCHES.  189 

into  harmony  with  all  the  adjuncts  and  incidents  of  the 
man  as  a  whole,  so  much  so,  that  although  I  would  have 
said  that  the  accent  of  Dr.  Chalmers  was  distasteful, 
yet  in  Dr.  Chalmers  himself  I  would  not  have  had  it 
altered  in  the  smallest  degree."  Chalmers  spoke  with  a 
massive  eloquence  in  keeping  with  his  powerful  frame 
and  his  broad  brow  and  his  commanding  presence.  His 
speeches  were  a  strenuous  blending  of  argument  and  emo- 
tion. They  appealed  at  once  to  the  strong  common-sense 
and  to  the  deep  religious  convictions  of  his  Scottish  audi- 
ences. His  whole  soul  was  m  his  work  as  a  leader  of 
religious  movements.  He  cared  little  or  nothing  for  any 
popularity  or  fame  that  he  might  have  won.  Some  strong 
and  characteristic  words  of  his  own  have  told  us  what  he 
thought  of  passing  renown.  He  called  it  "  a  popularity 
which  rifles  home  of  its  sweets  ;  and  by  elevating  a  man 
above  his  fellows  places  him  in  a  region  of  desolation, 
where  he  stands  a  conspicuous  mark  for  the  shafts  of 
malice,  envy,  and  detraction;  a  popularity  which,  with 
its  head  among  storms  and  its  feet  on  the  treacherous 
quicksands,  has  nothing  to  lull  the  agonies  of  its  tottering 
existence  but  the  hosannas  of  a  drivelling  generation." 
There  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that  these  were  Chalmers's 
genuine  sentiments ;  and  scarcely  any  man  of  his  time  had 
come  into  so  sudden  and  great  an  endowment  of  popularity. 
The  reader  of  to-day  must  not  look  for  adequate  illustra- 
tion of  the  genius  and  the  influence  of  Chalmers  in  his 
published  works.  These  do,  indeed,  show  him  to  have 
been  a  strong  reasoner  and  a  man  of  original  mind  ;  but 
they  do  not  show  the  Chalmers  of  Scottish  controversy, 
that  Chalmers  must  be  studied  through  the  traces,  lying 
all  around,  of  his  influence  upon  the  mind  and  the  history 
of  the  Scottish  people.  The  Free  Church  of  Scotland  is 
his  monument.  He  did  not  make  that  Church.  It  was 
not  the  work  of  one  man,  or,  strictly  speaking,  of  one 


190  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

generation.  It  grew  naturally  out  of  the  inevitable 
struggle  between  Church  and  State.  But  Chalmers  did 
more  than  any  other  man  to  decide  the  moment  and  the 
manner  of  its  coming  into  existence,  and  its  success  is  his 
best  monument. 

For  we  may  anticipate  a  little  in  this  instance  as  in  that 
of  the  Oxford  movement,  and  mention  at  once  the  fact  that 
on  May  18th,  1843,  some  five  hundred  ministers  of  the 
Church  of  Scotland,  under  the  leadership  of  Dr.  Chalmers, 
seceded  from  the  old  Kirk  and  set  about  to  form  the  Free 
Church.  The  Government  of  Sir  Robert  Peel  had  made  a 
weak  effort  at  compromise  by  legislative  enactment,  but 
had  declined  to  introduce  any  legislation  which  should 
free  the  Kirk  of  Scotland  from  the  control  of  the  civil 
courts,  and  there  was  no  course  for  those  who  held  the 
views  of  Dr.  Chalmers  but  to  withdraw  from  the  Church 
which  admitted  that  claim  of  State  control.  Opinions 
may  differ  as  to  the  necessity,  the  propriety  of  the  seces- 
sion— as  to  its  effects  upon  the  history  and  the  character 
of  the  Scottish  people  since  that  time ;  but  there  can  be 
no  difference  of  opinion  as  to  the  spirit  of  self-sacrifice  in 
which  the  step  was  taken.  Five  hundred  ministers  on  that 
memorable  day  went  deliberately  forth  from  their  posi- 
tions of  comfort  and  honor,  from  home  and  competence, 
to  meet  an  uncertain  and  a  perilous  future,  with  perhaps 
poverty  and  failure  to  be  the  final  result  of  their  enter- 
prise, and  with  misconstruction  and  misrepresentation  to 
make  the  bitter  bread  of  poverty  more  bitter  still.  In  these 
pages  we  have  nothing  to  do  with  the  merits  of  religious 
controversies ;  and  it  is  no  part  of  our  concern  to  consider 
even  the  social  and  political  effects  produced  upon  Scot- 
land by  this  great  secession.  But  we  need  not  withhold 
our  admiration  from  the  men  who  risked  and  suffered  so 
much  in  the  cause  of  what  they  believed  to  be  their 
Church's  true  rights;  and  we  are  bound  to  give  this 


MOVEMENTS  IN  THE  CHURCHES.  191 

admiration  as  cordially  to  the  poor  and  nameless  ministers, 
the  men  of  the  rank  and  file,  about  whose  doings  history 
so  little  concerns  herself,  as  to  the  leaders  like  Chalmers, 
who,  whether  they  sought  it  or  not,  found  fame  shining 
on  their  path  of  self-sacrifice.  The  history  of  Scotland 
is  illustrated  by  many  great  national  deeds.  No  deed  it 
tells  of  surpasses  in  dignity  and  in  moral  grandeur  that 
secession — to  cite  the  words  of  the  protest — "from  an 
Establishment  which  we  loved  and  prized,  through  inter- 
ference with  conscience,  the  dishonor  done  to  Christ's 
crown,  and  the  rejection  of  his  sole  and  supreme  author- 
ity as  King  in  his  Church." 


192  A  II1STORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 


CHAPTER  XI. 

THE  DISASTERS  OP  CABUL. 

THE  earliest  days  of  the  Peel  Ministry  fell  upon  trouble, 
not  indeed  at  home,  but  abroad.  At  home  the  prospect 
still  seemed  bright.  The  birth  of  the  Queen's  eldest  son 
was  an  event  welcomed  by  national  congratulation .  There 
was  still  great  distress  in  the  agricultural  districts ;  but 
there  was  a  general  confidence  that  the  financial  genius  of 
Peel  would  quickly  find  some  way  to  make  burdens  light, 
and  that  the  condition  of  things  all  over  the  country  would 
begin  to  mend.  It  was  a  region  far  removed  from  the 
knowledge  and  the  thoughts  of  most  Englishmen  that 
supplied  the  news  now  beginning  to  come  into  England 
day  after  day,  and  to  thrill  the  country  with  the  tale  of 
one  of  the  greatest  disasters  to  English  policy  and  Eng- 
lish arms  to  be  found  in  all  the  record  of  our  dealings 
with  the  East.  There  are  many  still  living  who  can  recall 
with  an  impression  as  keen  as  though  it  belonged  to  yes- 
terday the  first  accounts  that  reached  this  country  of  the 
surrender  at  Cabul,  and  the  gradual  extinction  of  the 
army  that  tried  to  make  its  retreat  through  the  terrible 
Pass. 

This  grim  chapter  of  history  had  been  for  some  time  in 
preparation.  It  may  be  said  to  open  with  the  reign  itself. 
News  travelled  slowly  then;  and  it  was  quite  in  the  ordi- 
nary course  of  things  that  some  part  of  the  empire  might 
be  torn  with  convulsion  for  months  before  London  knew 
that  the  even  and  ordinary  condition  of  things  had  been 


THE  DISASTERS  OF  CABUL.  193 

disturbed.  In  this  instance  the  rejoicings  at  the  acces- 
sion of  the  young  Queen  were  still  going  on,  when  a  series 
of  events  had  begun  in  Central  Asia  destined  to  excite  the 
profoundest  emotion  in  England,  and  to  exercise  the  most 
powerful  influence  upon  our  foreign  policy  down  to  the 
present  hour.  On  September  20th,  1837,  Captain  Alexan- 
der Burnes  arrived  at  Cabul,  the  capital  of  the  State  of 
Cabul,  in  the  north  of  Afghanistan,  and  the  ancient  cap- 
ital of  the  Emperor  Baber,  whose  tomb  is  on  a  hill  out- 
side the  city.  Burnes  was  a  famous  Orientalist  and 
traveller,  the  Burton  or  Burnaby  of  his  day ;  he  had  con- 
ducted an  expedition  into  Central  Asia;  had  published 
his  travels  in  Bokhara,  and  had  been  sent  on  a  mission  by 
the  Indian  Government,  in  whose  service  he  was,  to  study 
the  navigation  of  the  Indus.  He  was,  it  may  be  remarked, 
a  member  of  the  family  of  Robert  Burns,  the  poet  himself 
having  changed  the  original  spelling  of  the  name  which 
all  the  other  members  of  the  family  retained.  The  object 
of  the  journey  of  Captain  Burnes  to  Cabul  in  1837  was, 
in  the  first  instance,  to  enter  into  commercial  relations 
with  Dost  Mahomed,  then  ruler  of  Cabul,  and  with  other 
chiefs  of  the  western  regions.  But  events  soon  changed 
his  business  from  a  commercial  into  a  political  and  diplo- 
matic mission ;  and  his  tragic  fate  would  make  his  journey 
memorable  to  Englishmen  forever,  even  if  other  events  had 
not  grown  out  of  it  which  give  it  a  place  of  more  than 
personal  importance  in  history. 

The  great  region  of  Afghanistan,  with  its  historical 
boundaries  as  varying  and  difficult  to  fix  at  certain  times 
as  those  of  the  old  Dukedom  of  Burgundy,  has  been  called 
the  land  of  transition  between  Eastern  and  Western  Asia. 
All  the  great  ways  that  lead  from  Persia  to  India  pass 
through  that  region.  There  is  a  proverb  which  declares 
that  no  one  can  be  king  of  Hindostan  without  first  becom- 
ing lord  of  Cabul.  The  Afghans  are  the  ruling  nation, 

13 


194  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

but  among  them  had  long  been  settled  Hindoos,  Arabs, 
Armenians,  Abyssinians,  and  men  of  other  races  and 
religions.  The  Afghans  are  Mohammedans  of  the  Shunite 
sect,  but  they  allowed  Hindoos,  Christians,  and  even  the 
Persians,  who  are  of  the  hated  dissenting  sect  of  the 
Shiites,  to  live  among  them,  and  even  to  rise  to  high  pos- 
ition and  influence.  The  founder  of  the  Afghan  Empire, 
Ahmed  Shah,  died  in  1773.  He  had  made  an  empire 
which  stretched  from  Herat  on  the  west  to  Sirhind  on  the 
east,  and  from  the  Oxus  and  Cashmere  on  the  north  to 
the  Arabian  Sea  and  the  mouths  of  the  Indus  on  the  south. 
The  death  of  his  son,  Timur  Shah,  delivered  the  kingdom 
up  to  the  hostile  factions,  intrigues,  and  quarrels  of  his 
sons :  the  leaders  of  a  powerful  tribe,  the  Barukzyes, 
took  advantage  of  the  events  that  arose  out  of  this  condi- 
tion of  things  to  dethrone  the  descendants  of  Ahmed 
Shah.  When  Captain  Burnes  visited  Afghanistan  in  1832, 
the  only  part  of  all  their  great  inheritance  which  yet  re- 
mained with  the  descendants  of  Ahmed  Shah  was  the 
principality  of  Herat.  The  remainder  of  Afghanistan  was 
parcelled  out  between  Dost  Mahomed  and  his  brothers. 
Dost  Mahomed  was  a  man  of  extraordinary  ability  and 
energy.  He  would  probably  have  made  a  name  as  a 
soldier  and  a  statesman  anywhere.  He  had  led  a  stormy 
youth,  but  had  put  away  with  maturity  and  responsibility 
the  vices  and  follies  of  his  earlier  years.  There  seems  no 
reason  to  doubt  that,  although  he  was  a  usurper,  he  was 
a  sincere  lover  of  his  country,  and  on  the  whole  a  wise 
and  just  ruler.  When  Captain  Burnes  visited  Dost 
Mahomed,  he  was  received  with  every  mark  of  friendship 
and  favor.  Dost  Mahomed  professed  to  be,  and  no  doubt 
at  one  time  was,  a  sincere  friend  of  the  English  Govern- 
ment and  people.  There  was,  however,  at  that  time  a 
quarrel  going  on  between  the  Shah  of  Persia  and  the 
Prince  of  Herat,  the  last  enthroned  representative,  as  has 


THE  DISASTERS  OF  CABUL.  195 

been  already  said,  of  the  great  family  on  whose  fall  Dost 
Mahomed  and  his  brothers  had  mounted  into  power.  So 
far  as  can  now  be  judged,  there  does  seem  to  have  been 
serious  and  genuine  ground  of  complaint  on  the  part  of 
Persia  against  the  ruler  of  Herat.  But  it  is  probable,  too, 
that  the  Persian  Shah  had  been  seeking  for,  and  in  any 
case  would  have  found,  a  pretext  for  making  war ;  and 
the  strong  impression  at  the  time  in  England,  and  among 
the  authorities  in  India,  was  that  Persia,  herself  was  but 
a  puppet  in  the  hands  of  Russia.  A  glance  at  the  map 
will  show  the  meaning  of  this  suspicion  and  the  reasons 
which  at  once  gave  it  plausibility,  and  would  have 
rendered  it  of  grave  importance.  If  Persia  were  merely 
the  instrument  of  Russia,  and  if  the  troops  of  the  Shah 
were  only  the  advance  guard  of  the  Czar,  then,  undoubt- 
edly, the  attack  on  Herat  might  have  been  regarded  as 
the  first  step  of  a  great  movement  of  Russia  toward  our 
Indian  dominion. 

There  were  other  reasons,  too,  to  give  this  suspicion 
some  plausibility.  Mysterious  agents  of  Russia,  officers 
in  her  service  and  others,  began  to  show  themselves  in 
Central  Asia  at  the  time  of  Captain  Burnes's  visit  to 
Dost  Mahomed.  Undoubtedly  Russia  did  set  herself  for 
some  reason  to  win  the  friendship  and  alliance  of  Dost 
Mahomed :  and  Captain  Burnes  was  for  his  part  engaged  in 
the  same  endeavor.  All  considerations  of  a  merely  com- 
mercial nature  had  long  since  been  put  away,  and  Burnes 
was  freely  and  earnestly  negotiating  with  Dost  Mahomed 
for  his  alliance.  Burnes  always  insisted  that  Dost 
Mahomed  himself  was  sincerely  anxious  to  become  an  ally 
of  England,  and  that  he  offered  more  than  once,  on  his  own 
free  part,  to  dismiss  the  Russian  agents  even  without  seeing 
them,  if  Burnes  desired  him  to  do  so.  But  for  some  reason 
Burnes's  superiors  did  not  share  his  confidence.  In 
Downing  Street  and  in  Simla  the  profoundest  distrust  of 


196  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

Dost  Mahomed  prevailed.  It  was  again  and  again  im- 
pressed on  Burnes  that  he  must  regard  Dost  Mahomed  as 
a  treacherous  enemy,  and  as  a  man  playing  the  part  of  Per- 
sia and  of  Russia.  It  is  impossible  now  to  estimate  fairly 
all  the  reasons  which  may  have  justified  the  English 
and  the  Indian  Governments  in  this  conviction.  But  we 
know  that  nothing  in  the  policy  afterward  followed  out 
by  the  Indian  authorities  exhibited  any  of  the  judgment 
and  wisdom  that  would  warrant  us  in  taking  anything 
for  granted  on  the  mere  faith  of  their  dictum.  The  story 
of  four  years — almost  to  a  day  the  extent  of  this  sad 
chapter  of  English  history — will  be  a  tale  of  such  misfor- 
tune, blunder,  and  humiliation  as  the  annals  of  England 
do  not  anywhere  else  present.  Blunders  which  were, 
indeed,  worse  than  crimes,  and  a  principle  of  action  which 
it  is  a  crime  in  any  rulers  to  sanction,  brought  things  to 
such  a  pass  with  us  that  in  a  few  years  from  the  accession 
of  the  Queen  we  had  in  Afghanistan  soldiers  who  were 
positively  afraid  to  fight  the  enemy,  and  some  English 
officials  who  were  not  ashamed  to  treat  for  the  removal 
of  our  most  formidable  foes  by  purchased  assassination. 
It  is  a  good  thing  for  us  all  to  read  in  cold  blood  this 
chapter  of  our  history.  It  will  teach  us  how  vain  is  a 
policy  founded  on  evil  and  ignoble  principles ;  how  vain 
is  the  strength  and  courage  of  men  when  they  have  not 
leaders  fit  to  command.  It  may  teach  us,  also,  not  to  be 
too  severe  in  our  criticism  of  other  nations.  The  failure 
of  the  French  invasion  of  Mexico  under  the  Second  Empire 
seems  like  glory  when  compared  with  the  failure  of  our 
attempt  to  impose  a  hated  sovereign  on  the  Afghan 
people. 

Captain  Burnes  then  was  placed  in  the  painful  diffi- 
culty of  having  to  carry  out  a  policy  of  which  he  entirely 
disapproved.  He  believed  in  Dost  Mahomed  as  a  friend, 
and  he  was  ordered  to  regard  him  as  an  enemy.  It  would 


THE  DISASTERS  OF  CABUL.  197 

have  been  better  for  the  career  and  for  the  reputation  of 
Burries  if  he  had  simply  declined  to  have  anything  to  do 
with  a  course  of  action  which  seemed  to  him  at  once 
unjust  and  unwise.  But  Burnes  was  a  young  man,  full  of 
youth's  energy  and  ambition.  He  thought  he  saw  a 
career  of  distinction  opening  before  him,  and  he  was 
unwilling  to  close  it  abruptly  by  setting  himself  in  obsti- 
nate opposition  to  his  superiors.  He  was,  besides,  of  a 
quick  mercurial  temperament,  over  which  mood  followed 
mood  in  rapid  succession  of  change.  A  slight  contradic- 
tion sometimes  threw  him  into  momentary  despondency  ; 
a  gleam  of  hope  elated  him  into  the  assurance  that  all 
was  won.  It  is  probable  that  after  awhile  he  may  have 
persuaded  himself  to  acquiesce  in  the  judgment  of  his 
chiefs.  On  the  other  hand,  Dost  Mahomed  was  placed  in 
a  position  of  great  difficulty  and  danger.  He  had  to 
choose.  He  could  not  remain  absolutely  independent  of 
all  the  disputants.  If  England  would  not  support  him, 
he  must  for  his  own  safety  find  alliances  elsewhere — in 
Russian  statecraft,  for  example.  He  told  Burnes  of  this 
again  and  again,  and  Burnes  endeavored,  without  the 
slightest  success,  to  impress  his  superiors  with  his  own 
views  as  to  the  reasonableness  of  Dost  Mahomed's  argu- 
ments. Runjeet  Singh,  the  daring  and  successful  ad- 
venturer who  had  annexed  the  whole  province  of  Cash- 
mere to  his  dominions,  was  the  enemy  of  Dost  Mahomed 
and  the  faithful  ally  of  England.  Dost  Mahomed  thought 
the  British  Government  could  assist  him  in  coming  to  terms 
with  Runjeet  Singh,  and  Burnes  had  assured  him  that 
the  British  Government  would  do  all  it  could  to  establish 
satisfactory  terms  of  peace  between  Afghanistan  and  the 
Punjaub,  over  which  Runjeet  Singh  ruled.  Burnes  wrote 
from  Cabul  to  say  that  Russia  had  made  substantial  offers 
to  Dost  Mahomed ;  Persia  had  been  lavish  in  her  biddings 
for  his  alliance ;  Bokhara  and  other  states  had  not  been 


198  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

backward ;  "  yet  in  all  that  has  passed,  or  is  daily  trans- 
piring, the  chief  of  Cabul  declares  that  he  prefers  the 
sympathy  and  friendly  offices  of  the  British  to  all  these 
offers,  however  alluring  they  may  seem,  from  Persia  or 
from  the  Emperor ;  which  places  his  good-sense  in  a 
light  more  than  prominent,  and  in  my  humble  judgment 
proves  that  by  an  earlier  attention  to  these  countries  we 
might  have  escaped  the  whole  of  these  intrigues  and  held 
long  since  a  stable  influence  in  Cabul."  Burnes,  however, 
was  unable  to  impress  his  superiors  with  any  belief  either 
in  Dost  Mahomed  or  in  the  policy  which  he  himself  advo- 
cated, and  the  result  was  that  Lord  Auckland,  the  Gov- 
ernor-general of  India,  at  length  resolved  to  treat  Dost 
Mahomed  as  an  enemy,  and  to  drive  him  from  Cabul. 
Lord  Auckland,  therefore,  entered  into  a  treaty  with 
Runjeet  Singh  and  Shah  Soojah-ool-Moolk,  the  exiled 
representative  of  what  we  may  call  the  legitimist  rulers 
of  Afghanistan,  for  the  restoration  of  the  latter  to  the 
throne  of  his  ancestors,  and  for  the  destruction  of  the 
power  of  Dost  Mahomed. 

It  ought  to  be  a  waste  of  time  to  enter  into  any  argu- 
ment in  condemnation  of  such  a  policy  in  our  days.  Even 
if  its  results  had  not  proved  in  this  particular  instance  its 
most  striking  and  exemplary  condemnation,  it  is  so  grossly 
and  flagrantly  opposed  to  all  the  principles  of  our  more 
modern  statesmanship  that  no  one  among  us  ought  now 
to  need  a  warning  against  it.  Dost  Mahomed  was  the 
accepted,  popular,  and  successful  ruler  of  Cabul.  No 
matter  what  our  quarrel  with  him,  we  had  not  the  slight- 
est right  to  make  it  an  excuse  for  forcing  on  his  people  a 
ruler  whom  they  had  proved  before,  as  they  were  soon  to 
prove  again,  that  they  thoroughly  detested.  Perhaps  the 
nearest  parallel  to  our  policy  in  this  instance  is  to  be 
found  in  the  French  invasion  of  Mexico,  and  the  disas- 
trous attempt  to  impose  a  foreign  ruler  on  the  Mexican 


THE  DISASTERS  OF  CABUL.  199 

people.  Each  experiment  ended  in  utter  failure,  and  in 
the  miserable  death  of  the  unfortunate  puppet  prince  who 
was  put  forward  as  the  figure-head  of  the  enterprise. 
But  the  French  Emperor  could  at  least  have  pleaded  in 
his  defence  that  Maximilian  of  Austria  had  not  already 
heen  tried  and  rejected  by  the  Mexican  people.  Our  pro- 
teg$  had  been  tried  and  rejected.  The  French  Emperor 
might  have  pleaded  that  he  had  actual  and  substantial 
wrongs  to  avenge.  We  had  only  problematical  and  possi- 
ble dangers  to  guard  against.  In  any  case,  as  has  been 
already  said,  the  calamities  entailed  on  French  arms  and 
counsels  by  the  Mexican  intervention  read  like  a  page  of 
brilliant  success  when  compared  with  the  immediate 
result  of  our  enterprise  in  Cabul.  Before  passing  away 
from  this  part  of  the  subject,  it  is  necessary  to  mention 
the  fact  that  among  its  many  unfortunate  incidents  the 
campaign  led  to  some  peculiarly  humiliating  debates  and 
some  lamentable  accusations  in  the  House  of  Commons. 
Years  after  Burnes  had  been  flung  into  his  bloody  grave,  it 
was  found  that  the  English  Government  had  presented  to 
the  House  of  Commons  his  despatches  in  so  mutilated 
and  altered  a  form,  that  Burnes  was  made  to  seem  as  if  he 
actually  approved  and  recommended  the  policy  which  he 
especially  warned  us  to  avoid.  It  is  painful  to  have  to 
record  such  a  fact,  but  it  is  indispensable  that  it  should  be 
recorded.  It  would  be  vain  to  attempt  to  explain  how 
the  principles  and  the  honor,  of  English  statesmanship 
fell,  for  the  hour,  under  the  demoralizing  influence  which 
allowed  such  things  to  be  thought  legitimate.  An  Ori- 
ential  atmosphere  seemed  to  have  gathered  around  our 
official  leaders.  In  Afghanistan  they  were  entering  into 
secret  and  treacherous  treaties ;  in  England  they  were 
garbling  despatches.  When,  years  after,  Lord  Palmer- 
ston  was  called  upon  to  defend  the  policy  which  had  thus 
dealt  with  the  despatches  of  Alexander  Burnes,  he  did 


200  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

not  say  that  the  documents  were  not  garbled.  He  only 
contended  that,  as  the  Government  had  determined  not  to 
act  on  the  advice  of  Burnes,  they  were  in  nowise  bound 
to  publish  those  passages  of  his  despatches  in  which  he 
set  forth  assumptions  which  they  believed  to  be  un- 
founded, and  advised  a  policy  which  they  looked  upon  as 
mistaken.  Such  a  defence  is  only  to  be  read  with  wonder 
and  pain.  The  Government  were  not  accused  of  sup- 
pressing passages  which  they  believed,  rightly  or  wrongly, 
to  be  worthless.  The  accusation  was  that,  by  suppressing 
passages  and  sentences  here  and  there,  Burnes  was  made 
to  appear  as  if  he  were  actually  recommending  the  policy 
against  which  he  was  at  the  time  most  earnestly  protest- 
ing. Burnes  was  himself  the  first  victim  of  the  policy 
which  he  strove  against,  and  which  all  England  has  since 
condemned.  No  severer  word  is  needed  to  condemn  the 
mutilation  of  his  despatches  than  to  say  that  he  was 
actually  made  to  stand  before  the  country  as  responsible 
for  having  recommended  that  very  policy.  "It  should 
never  be  forgotten,"  says  Sir  J.  "YV.  Kaye,  the  historian 
of  the  Afghan  War,  "  by  those  who  would  form  a  correct 
estimate  of  the  character  and  career  of  Alexander  Burnes, 
that  both  had  been  misrepresented  in  those  collections  of 
state  papers  which  are  supposed  to  furnish  the  best 
materials  of  history,  but  which  are  often  in  reality  only 
one-sided  compilations  of  garbled  documents — counter- 
feits, which  the  ministerial  stamp  forces  into  currency, 
defrauding  a  present  generation,  and  handing  down  to 
posterity  a  chain  of  dangerous  lies." 

Meanwhile  the  Persian  attack  on  Herat  had  practically 
failed,  owing  mainly  to  the  skill  and  spirit  of  a  young 
English  officer,  Eldred  Pottinger,  who  was  assisting  the 
prince  in  his  resistance  to  the  troops  of  the  Persian 
Shah.  Lord  Auckland,  however,  ordered  the  assemblage 
of  a  British  force  for  service  across  the  Indus,  and  issued 


THE  DISASTERS  OF  CABUL.  201 

a  famous  manifesto,  dated  from  Simla,  October  1st,  1838,  in 
which  he  set  forth  the  motives  of  his  policy.  The  Gover- 
nor-general stated  that  Dost  Mahomed  had  made  a  sudden 
and  unprovoked  attack  upon  our  ancient  ally,  Runjeet 
Singh,  and  that  when  the  Persian  army  was  besieging 
Herat,  Dost  Mahomed  was  giving  undisguised  support 
to  the  designs  of  Persia.  The  chiefs  of  Candahar,  the 
brothers  of  Dost  Mahomed,  had  also,  Lord  Auckland 
declared,  given  in  their  adherence  to  the  plan  of  Persia. 
Great  Britain  regarded  the  advance  of  Persian  arms  in 
Afghanistan  as  an  act  of  hostility  toward  herself.  The 
Governor-general  had,  therefore,  resolved  to  support  the 
claims  of  the  Shah  Soojah-ool-Moolk,  whose  dominions 
had  been  usurped  by  the  existing  rulers  of  Cabul,  and 
who  had  found  an  honorable  asylum  in  British  territory  ; 
and  "  whose  popularity  throughout  Afghanistan  " — Lord 
Auckland  wrote  in  words  that  must  afterward  have  read 
like  the  keenest  and  cruellest  satire  upon  his  policy — "  had 
been  proved  to  his  Lordship  by  the  strong  and  unanimous 
testimony  of  the  best  authorities."  This  popular  sover- 
eign, this  favorite  of  his  people,  was  at  the  time  living  in 
exile,  without  the  faintest  hope  of  every  again  being 
restored  to  his  dominions.  We  pulled  the  poor  man  out 
of  his  obscurity,  told  him  that  his  people  were  yearning 
for  him,  and  that  we  would  set  him  on  his  throne  once 
more.  We  entered  for  the  purpose  into  the  tripartite 
treaty  already  mentioned.  Mr.  (afterward  Sir  W.  H.) 
Macnaghten,  Secretary  to  the  Government  of  India,  was 
appointed  to  be  envoy  and  minister  at  the  court  of  Shah 
Soojah ;  and  Sir  Alexander  Burnes  (who  had  been  recalled 
from  the  court  of  Dost  Mahomed,  and  rewarded  with  a 
title  for  giving  the  advice  which  his  superiors  thought 
absurd)  was  deputed  to  act  under  his  direction.  It  is 
only  right  to  say  that  the  policy  of  Lord  Auckland  had  the 
entire  approval  of  the  British  Government.  It  was  after- 


202  A  UISTOBY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

ward  stated  in  parliament  on  the  part  of  the  ministry 
that  a  despatch  recommending  to  Lord  Auckland  exactly 
such  a  course  as  he  pursued  crossed  on  the  way  his  de- 
spatch announcing  to  the  Government  at  home  that  he 
had  already  undertaken  the  enterprise. 

We  conquered  Dost  Mahomed  and  dethroned  him.  He 
made  a  bold  and  brilliant,  sometimes  even  a  splendid 
resistance.  "We  took  Ghuznee  by  blowing  up  one  of  its 
gates  with  bags  of  powder,  and  thus  admitting  the  rush 
of  a  storming-party.  It  was  defended  by  one  of  the  sons 
of  Dost  Mahomed,  who  became  our  prisoner.  We  took 
Jellalabad,  which  was  defended  by  Akbar  Khan,  another 
of  Dost  Mahomed's  sons,  whose  name  came  afterward  to 
have  a  hateful  sound  in  all  English  ears.  As  we  ap- 
proached Cabul,  Dost  Mahomed  abandoned  his  capital 
and  fled  with  a  few  horsemen  across  the  Indus.  Shah 
Soojah  entered  Cabul  accompanied  by  the  British  officers. 
It  was  to  have  been  a  triumphal  entry.  The  hearts  of 
those  who  believed  in  his  cause  must  have  sunk  within 
them  when  they  saw  how  the  Shah  was  received  by  the 
people  who,  Lord  Auckland  was  assured,  were  so  devoted 
to  him.  The  city  received  him  in  sullen  silence.  Few  of 
its  people  condescended  even  to  turn  out  to  see  him  as  he 
passed.  The  vast  majority  stayed  away,  and  disdained 
even  to  look  at  him.  One  would  have  thought  that  the 
least  observant  eye  must  have  seen  that  his  throne  could 
not  last  a  moment  longer  than  the  time  during  which  the 
strength  of  Britain  was  willing  to  support  it.  The  British 
army,  however,  withdrew,  leaving  only  a  contingent  of 
some  eight  thousand  men,  besides  the  Shah's  own  hire- 
lings, to  maintain  him  for  the  present.  Sir  W.  Macnaghten 
seems  to  have  really  believed  that  the  work  was  done, 
and  that  Shah  Soojah  was  as  safe  on  his  throne  as  Queen 
Victoria.  He  was  destined  to  be  very  soon  and  very 
cruelly  undeceived. 


THE  DISASTERS  OF  CABUL.  203 

Dost  Mahomed  made  more  than  one  effort  to  regain  his 
place.  He  invaded  Shah  Soojah's  dominions,  and  met  the 
combined  forces  of  the  Shah  and  their  English  ally  in 
more  than  one  battle.  On  November  2d,  1840,  he  won 
the  admiration  of  the  English  themselves  by  the  brilliant 
stand  he  made  against  them.  With  his  Afghan  horse  he 
drove  our  cavalry  before  him,  and  forced  them  to  seek 
the  shelter  of  the  British  guns.  The  native  troopers 
would  not  stand  against  him :  they  fled  and  left  their  Eng- 
lish officers,  who  vainly  tried  to  rally  them.  In  this  battle 
of  Purwandurrah  victory  might  not  unreasonably  have 
been  claimed  for  Dost  Mahomed.  He  won  at  least  his  part 
of  the  battle.  Xo  tongues  have  praised  him  louder  than 
those  of  English  historians.  But  Dost  Mahomed  had  the 
wisdom  of  a  statesman  as  well  as  the  genius  of  a  soldier. 
He  knew  well  that  he  could  not  hold  out  against  the 
strength  of  England.  A  savage  or  semi-barbarous  chief- 
tain is  easily  puffed  up  by  a  seeming  triumph  over  a 
great  Power,  arid  is  led  to  his  destruction  by  the  vain 
hope  that  he  can  hold  out  against  it  to  the  last.  Dost 
Mahomed  had  no  such  ignorant  and  idle  notion.  Perhaps 
he  knew  well  enough,  too,  that  time  was  wholly  on  his 
side ;  that  he  had  only  to  wait  and  see  the  sovereignty  of 
Shah  Soojah  tumble  into  pieces.  The  evening  after  his 
brilliant  exploit  in  the  field  Dost  Mahomed  rode  quietly 
to  the  quarters  of  Sir  W.  Macnaghten,  met  the  envoy, 
who  was  returning  from  an  evening  ride,  and  to  Mac- 
naghten's  utter  amazement  announced  himself  as  Dost 
Mahomed,  tendered  to  the  envoy  the  sword  that  had 
flashed  so  splendidly  across  the  field  of  the  previous  day's 
fight,  and  surrendered  himself  a  prisoner.  His  sword  was 
returned ;  he  was  treated  with  all  honor ;  and  a  few  days 
afterward  he  was  sent  to  India,  where  a  residence  and  a 
revenue  were  assigned  to  him. 

But  the  withdrawal  of  Dost  Mahomed  from  the  scene 


204  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

did  nothing  to  secure  the  reign  of  the  unfortunate  Shah 
Soojah.  The  Shah  was  hated  on  his  own  account.  He 
was  regarded  as  a  traitor  who  had  sold  his  country  to  the 
foreigners.  Insurrections  began  to  be  chronic.  They 
were  going  on  in  the  very  midst  of  Cabul  itself.  Sir  W. 
Macnaghten  was  warned  of  danger,  but  seemed  to  take  no 
heed.  Some  fatal  blindness  appears  to  have  suddenly 
fallen  on  the  eyes  of  our  people  in  Cabul.  On  November 
2d,  1841,  an  insurrection  broke  out.  Sir  Alexander  Burnes 
lived  in  the  city  itself ;  Sir  W.  Macnaghten  and  the 
military  commander,  Major-general  Elphinstone,  were  in 
cantonments  at  some  little  distance.  The  insurrection 
might  have  been  put  down  hi  the  first  instance  with 
hardly  the  need  even  of  Napoleon's  famous  "whiff  of 
grape-shot."  But  it  was  allowed  to  grow  up  without 
attempt  at  control.  Sir  Alexander  Burnes  could  not  be 
got  to  believe  that  it  was  anything  serious,  even  when 
a  fanatical  and  furious  mob  were  besieging  his  own  house. 
The  fanatics  were  especially  bitter  against  Burnes,  because 
they  believed  that  he  had  been  guilty  of  treachery.  They 
accused  him  of  having  pretended  to  be  the  friend  of  Dost 
Mahomed,  deceived  him,  and  brought  the  English  into  the 
country.  How  entirely  innocent  of  this  charge  Burnes 
was  we  all  now  know ;  but  it  would  be  idle  to  deny  that 
there  was  much  in  the  external  aspect  of  events  to  excuse 
such  a  suspicion  in  the  mind  of  an  infuriated  Afghan.  To 
the  last  Burnes  refused  to  believe  that  he  was  in  danger. 
He  had  always  been  a  friend  to  the  Afghans,  he  said,  and 
he  could  have  nothing  to  fear.  It  was  true.  He  had 
always  been  the  sincere  friend  of  the  Afghans.  It  was  his 
misfortune,  and  the  heavy  fault  of  his  superiors,  that  he 
had  been  made  to  appear  as  an  enemy  of  the  Afghans.  He 
had  now  to  pay  a  heavy  penalty  for  the  errors  and  the 
wrong-doing  of  others.  He  harangued  the  raging  mob, 
and  endeavored  to  bring  them  to  reason.  He  does  not 


THE  DISASTERS  OF  CABUL. 

seem  to  have  understood,  up  to  the  very  last  moment,  that 
by  reminding  them  that  he  was  Alexander  Burnes,  their 
old  friend,  he  was  only  giving  them  a  new  reason  for 
demanding  his  life.  He  was  murdered  in  the  tumult. 
He  and  his  brother  and  all  those  with  them  were  hacked 
to  pieces  with  Afghan  knives.  He  was  only  in  his  thirty- 
seventh  year  when  he  was  murdered.  He  was  the  first 
victim  of  the  policy  which  had  resolved  to  intervene  in 
the  affairs  of  Afghanistan.  Fate  seldom  showed  with 
more  strange  and  bitter  malice  her  proverbial  irony  than 
when  she  made  him  the  first  victim  of  the  policy  adopted 
in  despite  of  his  best  advice  and  his  strongest  warnings. 

The  murder  of  Burnes  was  not  a  climax ;  it  was  only  a 
beginning.  The  English  troops  were  quartered  in  canton- 
ments outside  the  city,  and  at  some  little  distance  from  it. 
These  cantonments  were,  in  any  case  of  real  difficulty, 
practically  indefensible.  The  popular  monarch,  the  dar- 
ling of  his  people,  whom  we  had  restored  to  his  throne, 
was  in  the  Balla  Hissar,  or  citadel  of  Cabul.  From  the 
moment  when  the  .insurrection  broke  out  he  may  be 
regarded  as  a  prisoner  or  a  besieged  man  there.  He  was 
as  utterly  unable  to  help  our  people  as  they  were  to  help 
him.  The  whole  country  threw  itself  into  insurrection 
against  him  and  us.  The  Afghans  attacked  the  canton- 
ments, and  actually  compelled  the  English  to  abandon  the 
forts  in  which  all  our  commissariat  was  stored.  We  were 
thus  threatened  with  famine,  even  if  we  could  resist  the 
enemy  in  arms.  We  were  strangely  unfortunate  in  our 
civil  and  military  leaders.  Sir  W.  Macnaghten  was  a  man 
of  high  character  and  good  purpose,  but  he  was  weak  and 
credulous.  The  commander,  General  Elphinstone,  was 
old,  infirm,  tortured  by  disease,  broken  down  both  in  mind 
and  body,  incapable  of  forming  a  purpose  of  his  own,  or 
of  holding  to  one  suggested  by  anybody  else.  His  second 
in  command  was  a  far  stronger  and  abler  man,  but 


206  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

unhappily  the  two  could  never  agree.  "  They  were  both 
of  them,"  says  Sir  J.  W.  Kaye,  "brave  men.  In  any 
other  situation,  though  the  physical  infirmities  of  the  one 
and  the  cankered  vanity,  the  dogmatical  perverseness  of 
the  other,  might  have  in  some  measure  detracted  from 
their  efficiency  as  military  commanders,  I  believe  they 
would  have  exhibited  sufficient  courage  and  constancy  to 
rescue  an  army  from  utter  destruction,  and  the  British 
name  from  indelible  reproach.  But  in  the  Cabul  canton- 
ments they  were  miserably  out  of  place.  They  seem  to 
have  been  sent  there,  by  superhuman  intervention,  to 
work  out  the  utter  ruin  and  prostration  of  an  unholy 
policy  by  ordinary  human  means."  One  fact  must  be 
mentioned  by  an  English  historian — one  which  an  English 
historian  has  happily  not  often  to  record.  It  is  certain 
that  an  officer  in  our  service  entered  into  negotiations  for 
the  murder  of  the  insurgent  chiefs,  who  were  our  worst 
enemies.  It  is  more  than  probable  that  he  believed  in 
doing  so  he  was  acting  as  Sir  W.  Macnaghten  would  have 
had  him  do.  Sir  W.  Macnaghten  was  innocent  of  any 
complicity  in  such  a  plot,  and  was  incapable  of  it.  But 
the  negotiations  were  opened  and  carried  on  in  his  name. 
A  new  figure  appeared  on  the  scene,  a  dark  and  a  fierce 
apparition.  This  was  Akbar  Khan,  the  favorite  son  of 
Dost  Mahomed.  He  was  a  daring,  a  clever,  an  unscrupu- 
lous young  man.  From  the  moment  when  he  entered 
Cabul  he  became  the  real  leader  of  the  insurrection 
against  Shah  Soojah  and  us.  Macnaghten,  persuaded  by 
the  military  commander  that  the  position  of  things  was 
hopeless,  consented  to  enter  into  negotiations  with  Akbar 
Khan.  Before  the  arrival  of  the  latter  the  chiefs  of  the 
insurrection  had  offered  us  terms  which  made  the  ears  of 
our  envoy  tingle.  Such  terms  had  not  often  been  even 
suggested  to  British  soldiers  before.  They  were  simply 
unconditional  surrender.  Macnaghten  indignantly  re- 


THE  DISASTERS  OF  CABUL.  207 

jected  them.  Everything  went  wrong  with  him,  how- 
ever. We  were  beaten  again  and  again  by  the  Afghans. 
Our  officers  never  faltered  in  their  duty ;  but  the  melan- 
choly truth  has  to  be  told  that  the  men,  most  of  whom 
were  Asiatics,  at  last  began  to  lose  heart  and  would  not 
fight  the  enemy.  So  the  envoy  was  compelled  to  enter 
into  terms  with  Akbar  Khan  and  the  other  chiefs.  Akbar 
Khan  received  him  at  first  with  contemptuous  insolence — 
as  a  haughty  conqueror  receives  some  ignoble  and  humili- 
ated adversary.  It  was  agreed  that  the  British  troops 
should  quit  Afghanistan  at  once ;  that  Dost  Mahomed  and 
family  should  be  sent  back  to  Afghanistan ;  that  on  his 
return  the  unfortunate  Shah  Soojah  should  be  allowed  to 
take  himself  off  to  India  or  where  he  would ;  and  that 
some  British  officers  should  be  left  at  Cabul  as  hostages 
for  the  fulfilment  of  the  conditions. 

The  evacuation  did  not  take  place  at  once,  although  the 
fierce  winter  was  setting  in,  and  the  snow  was  falling 
heavily,  ominously.  Macnaghten  seems  to  have  had  still 
some  lingering  hopes  that  something  would  turn  up  to 
relieve  him  from  the  shame  of  quitting  the  country ;  and 
it  must  be  owned  that  he  does  not  seem  to  have  had  any 
intention  of  carrying  out  the  terms  of  the  agreement  if  by 
any  chance  he  could  escape  from  them.  On  both  sides 
there  were  dallyings  and  delays.  At  last  Akbar  Khan 
made  a  new  and  startling  proposition  to  our  envoy.  It 
was  that  they  two  should  enter  into  a  secret  treaty, 
should  unite  their  arms  against  the  other  chiefs,  and 
should  keep  Shah  Soojah  on  the  throne  as  nominal  king, 
with  Akbar  Khan  as  his  vizier.  Macnaghten  caught  at 
the  proposals.  He  had  entered  into  terms  of  negotiation 
with  the  Afghan  chiefs  together;  he  now  consented  to 
enter  into  a  secret  treaty  with  one  of  the  chiefs  to  turn 
their  joint  arms  against  the  others.  It  would  be  idle  and 
shameful  to  attempt  to  defend  such  a  policy.  We  can 


208  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

only  excuse  it  by  considering  the  terrible  circumstances 
of  Macnaghten's  position,  the  manner  in  which  his  nerves 
and  moral  fibre  had  been  shaken  and  shattered  by  ca- 
lamities, and  his  doubts  whether  he  could  place  any  reli- 
ance on  the  promises  of  the  chiefs.  lie  had  apparently 
sunk  into  that  condition  of  mind  which  Macaulay  tells  us 
that  Clive  adopted  so  readily  in  his  dealings  with  Asiat- 
ics, and  under  the  influence  of  which  men  naturally  hon- 
orable and  high-minded  come  to  believe  that  it  is  right  to 
act  treacherously  with  those  whom  we  believe  to  be  treach- 
erous. All  this  is  but  excuse,  and  rather  poor  excuse. 
When  it  has  all  been  said  and  thought  of,  we  must  still 
be  glad  to  believe  that  there  are  not  many  Englishmen 
who  would,  under  any  circumstances,  have  consented  even 
to  give  a  hearing  to  the  proposals  of  Akbar  Khan. 

Whatever  Macnaghten's  error,  it  was  dearly  expiated. 
He  went  out  at  noon  next  day  to  confer  with  Akbar  Khan 
on  the  banks  of  the  neighboring  river.  Three  of  his  offi- 
cers were  with  him.  Akbar  Khan  was  ominously  sur- 
rounded by  friends  and  retainers.  These  kept  pressing 
round  the  unfortunate  envoy.  Some  remonstrances  was 
made  by  one  of  the  English  officers,  but  Akbar  Khan  said 
it  was  of  no  consequence,  as  they  were  all  in  the  secret. 
Not  many  words  were  spoken;  the  expected  conference 
had  hardly  begun  when  a  signal  was  given  or  an  order 
issued  by  Akbar  Khan,  and  the  envoy  and  the  officers 
were  suddenly  seized  from  behind.  A  scene  of  wild  con- 
fusion followed,  in  which  hardly  anything  is  clear  and 
certain  but  the  one  most  horrible  incident.  The  envoy 
struggled  with  Akbar  Khan,  who  had  himself  seized  Mac- 
naghten ;  Akbar  Khan  drew  from  his  belt  one  of  a  pair 
of  pistols  which  Macnaghten  had  presented  to  him  a  short 
time  before,  and  shot  him  through  the  body.  The  fanat- 
ics who  were  crowding  round  hacked  the  body  to  pieces 
with  their  knives.  Of  the  three  officers  one  was  killed  on 


THE  DISASTERS  OF  CABUL.  209 

the  spot;   the  other  two  were  forced  to  mount  Afghan 
horses  and  carried  away  as  prisoners. 

At  first  this  horrid  deed  of  treachery  and  blood  shows 
like  that  to  which  Clearchus  and  his  companions,  the 
chiefs  of  the  famous  ten  thousand  Greeks,  fell  victims  at 
the  hands  of  Tissaphernes,  the  Persian  satrap.  But  it 
seems  certain  that  the  treachery  of  Akbar,  base  as  it  was, 
did  not  contemplate  more  than  the  seizure  of  the  envoy 
and  his  officers.  There  were  jealousies  and  disputes  among 
the  chiefs  of  the  insurrection.  One  of  them,  in  especial, 
had  got  his  mind  filled  with  the  conviction,  inspired,  no 
doubt,  by  the  unfortunate  and  unparalleled  negotiation 
already  mentioned,  that  the  envoy  had  offered  a  price  for 
his  head.  Akbar  Khan  was  accused  by  him  of  being  a 
secret  friend  of  the  envoy  and  the  English.  Akbar  Khan's 
father  was  a  captive  in  the  hands  of  the  English,  and  it 
may  have  been  thought  that  on  his  account  and  for  per- 
sonal purposes  Akbar  was  favoring  the  envoy,  and  even 
intriguing  with  him.  Akbar  offered  to  prove  his  sincerity 
by  making  the  envoy  a  captive  and  handing  him  over  to 
the  chiefs.  This  was  the  treacherous  plot  which  he  strove 
to  carry  out  by  entering  into  the  secret  negotiations  with 
the  easily-deluded  envoy.  On  the  fatal  day  the  latter 
resisted  and  struggled ;  Akbar  Khan  heard  a  cry  of  alarm 
that  the  English  soldiers  were  coming  out  of  the  canton- 
ments to  rescue  the  envoy ;  and,  wild  with  passion,  he 
suddenly  drew  his  pistol  and  fired.  This  was  the  state- 
ment made  again  and  again  by  Akbar  Khan  himself.  It 
does  not  seem  an  improbable  explanation  for  what  other- 
wise looks  a  murder  as  stupid  and  purposeless  as  it  was 
brutal.  The  explanation  does  not  much  relieve  the  dark- 
ness of  Akbar  Khan's  character.  It  is  given  here  as  his- 
tory, not  as  exculpation.  There  is  not  the  slightest  reason 
to  suppose  that  Akbar  Khan  would  have  shrunk  from 
any  treachery  or  any  cruelty  which  served  his  purpose. 

14 


210  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

His  own  explanation  of  his  purpose  in  this  instance  shows 
a  degree  of  treachery  which  could  hardly  be  surpassed 
even  in  the  East.  But  it  is  well  to  bear  in  mind  that  the 
suspicion  of  perfidy  under  which  the  English  envoy 
labored,  and  which  was  the  main  impulse  of  Akbar  Khan's 
movement,  had  evidence  enough  to  support  it  in  the  eyes 
of  suspicious  enemies  ;  and  that  poor  Macnaghten  would 
not  have  been  murdered  had  he  not  consented  to  meet 
Akbar  Khan  and  treat  with  him  on  a  proposition  to  which 
an  English  official  should  never  have  listened. 

A  terrible  agony  of  suspense  followed  among  the  little 
English  force  in  the  cantonments.  The  military  chiefs 
afterward  stated  that  they  did  not  know  until  the  follow- 
ing day  that  any  calamity  had  befallen  the  envoy.  But 
a  keen  suspicion  ran  through  the  cantonments  that  some 
fearful  deed  had  been  done.  No  step  was  taken  to  avenge 
the  death  of  Macnaghten,  even  when  it  became  known 
that  his  hacked  and  mangled  body  had  been  exhibited  in 
triumph  all  through  the  streets  and  bazars  of  Cabul.  A 
paralysis  seemed  to  have  fallen  over  the  councils  of  our 
military  chiefs.  On  December  24th,  1841,  came  a  letter 
from  one  of  the  officers  seized  by  Akbar  Khan,  accom- 
panying proposals  for  a  treaty  from  the  Afghan  chiefs.  It 
is  hard  now  to  understand  how  any  English  officers  could 
have  consented  to  enter  into  terms  with  the  murderers 
of  Macnaghten  before  his  mangled  body  could  well  have 
ceased  to  bleed.  It  is  strange  that  it  did  not  occur  to 
most  of  them  that  there  was  an  alternative ;  that  they 
were  not  ordered  by  fate  to  accept  whatever  the  conquerors 
chose  to  offer.  We  can  all  see  the  difficulty  of  their  posi- 
tion. General  Elphinstone  and  his  second  in  command, 
Brigadier  Shelton,  were  convinced  that  it  would  be  equally 
impossible  to  stay  where  they  were  or  to  cut  their  way 
through  the  Afghans.  But  it  might  have  occurred  to 
many  that  they  were  nevertheless  not  bound  to  treat  with 


THE  DISASTERS  OF  CABUL.  211 

the  Afghans.  They  might  have  remembered  the  famous 
answer  of  the  father  in  Corneille's  immortal  drama,  who 
is  asked  what  his  son  could  have  done  but  yield  in  the 
face  of  such  odds,  and  exclaims  in  generous  passion  that 
he  could  have  died.  One  English  officer  of  mark  did 
counsel  his  superiors  in  this  spirit.  This  was  Major 
Eldred  Pottinger,  whose  skill  and  courage  in  the  defence 
of  Herat  we  have  already  mentioned.  Pottinger  was  for 
cutting  their  way  through  all  enemies  and  difficulties  as 
far  as  they  could,  and  then  occupying  the  ground  with 
their  dead  bodies.  But  his  advice  was  hardly  taken  into 
consideration.  It  was  determined  to  treat  with  the  Af- 
ghans ;  and  treating  with  the  Afghans  now  meant  accept- 
ing any  terms  the  Afghans  chose  to  impose  on  their  fallen 
enemies.  In  the  negotiations  that  went  on,  some  written 
documents  were  exchanged.  One  of  these,  drawn  up  by 
the  English  negotiators,  contains  a  short  sentence  which 
we  believe  to  be  absolutely  unique  in  the  history  of  British 
dealings  with  armed  enemies.  It  is  an  appeal  to  the 
Afghan  conquerors  not  to  be  too  hard  upon  the  vanquished ; 
not  to  break  the  bruised  reed.  "In  friendship,  kindness 
and  consideration  are  necessary,  not  overpowering  the 
weak  with  sufferings ! "  In  friendship ! — we  appealed  to 
the  friendship  of  Macnaghten's  murderers  ;  to  the  friend- 
ship, in  any  case,  of  the  man  whose  father  we  had  de- 
throned and  driven  into  exile.  Not  overpowering  the 
weak  with  sufferings !  The  weak  were  the  English !  One 
might  fancy  he  was  reading  the  plaintive  and  piteous 
appeal  of  some  forlorn  and  feeble  tribe  of  helpless  half- 
breeds  for  the  mercy  of  arrogant  and  mastering  rulers. 
"  Suffolk's  imperious  tongue  is  stern  and  rough,"  says 
one  in  Shakspeare's  pages,  when  he  is  bidden  to  ask  for 
consideration  at  the  hands  of  captors  whom  he  is  no  longer 
able  to  resist.  The  tongue  with  which  the  English  force 
at  Cabul  addressed  the  Afghans  was  not  imperious  or 


212  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

stern  or  rough.  It  was  bated,  mild,  and  plaintive.  Only 
the  other  day,  it  would  seem,  these  men  had  blown  up 
the  gates  of  Ghuznee,  and  rushed  through  the  dense  smoke 
and  the  falling  ruins  to  attack  the  enemy  hand  to  hand. 
Only  the  other  day  our  envoy  had  received  in  surrender 
the  bright  sword  of  Dost  Mahomed.  Now  the  same  men 
who  had  seen  these  things  could  only  plead  for  a  little 
gentleness  of  consideration,  and  had  no  thought  of  resist- 
ance, and  did  not  any  longer  seem  to  know  how  to  die. 

We  accepted  the  terms  of  treaty  offered  to  us.  Nothing 
else  could  be  done  by  men  who  were  not  prepared  to 
adopt  the  advice  of  the  heroic  father  in  Corneille.  The 
English  were  at  once  to  take  themselves  off  out  of  Af- 
ghanistan, giving  up  all  their  guns  except  six,  which  they 
were  allowed  to  retain  for  their  necessary  defence  in 
their  mournful  journey  home ;  they  were  to  leave  behind 
all  the  treasure,  and  to  guarantee  the  payment  of  some- 
thing additional  for  the  safe-conduct  of  the  poor  little 
army  to  Peshawur  or  to  Jellalabad ;  and  they  were  to 
hand  over  six  officers  as  hostages  for  the  due  fulfilment 
of  the  conditions.  It  is  of  course  understood  that  the 
conditions  included  the  immediate  release  of  Dost  Ma- 
homed and  his  family  and  their  return  to  Afghanistan. 
When  these  should  return,  the  six  hostages  were  to  be 
released.  Only  one  concession  had  been  obtained  from 
the  conquerors.  It  was  at  first  demanded  that  some  of 
the  married  ladies  should  be  left  as  hostages  ;  but  on  the 
urgent  representations  of  the  English  officers  this  condi- 
tion was  waived — at  least  for  the  moment.  When  the 
treaty  was  signed,  the  officers  who  had  been  seized  when 
Macnaghten  was  murdered  were  released. 

It  is  worth  mentioning  that  these  officers  were  not 
badly  treated  by  Akbar  Khan  while  they  were  in  his 
power.  On  the  contrary,  he  had  to  make  strenuous 
efforts,  and  did  make  them  in  good  faith,  to  save  them 


THE  DISASTERS  OF  CABUL.  213 

from  being  murdered  by  bands  of  his  fanatical  followers. 
One  of  the  officers  has  himself  described  the  almost  des- 
perate efforts  which  Akbar  Khan  had  to  make  to  save 
him  from  the  fury  of  the  mob,  who  thronged  thirsting 
for  the  blood  of  the  Englishman  up  to  the  very  stirrup  of 
their  young  chief.  "  Akbar  Khan,"  says  this  officer,  "  at 
length  drew  his  sword  and  laid  about  him  right  man- 
fully" in  defence  of  his  prisoner.  When,  however,  he 
had  got  the  latter  into  a  place  of  safety,  the  impetuous 
young  Afghan  chief  could  not  restrain  a  sneer  at  his 
captive  and  the  cause  his  captive  represented.  Turning 
to  the  English  officer,  he  said  more  than  once,  "  in  a 
tone  of  triumphant  derision,"  some  words  such  as 
these :  "  So  you  are  the  man  who  came  here  to  seize  my 
country?"  It  must  be  owned  that  the  condition  of 
things  gave  bitter  meaning  to  the  taunt,  if  they  did  not 
actually  excuse  it.  At  a  later  period  of  this  melancholy 
story  it  is  told  by  Lady  Sale  that  crowds  of  the  fanatical 
Ghilzyes  were  endeavoring  to  persuade  Akbar  Khan 
to  slaughter  all  the  English,  and  that  when  he  tried 
to  pacify  them  they  said  that  when  Burnes  came  into 
the  country  they  entreated  Akbar  Khan's  father  to 
have  Burnes  killed,  or  he  would  go  back  to  Hindostan, 
and  on  some  future  day  return  and  bring  an  army 
with  him,  "  to  take  our  country  from  us ; "  and  all  the 
calamities  had  come  upon  them  because  Dost  Mahomed 
would  not  take  their  advice.  Akbar  Khan  either  was  or 
pretended  to  be  moderate.  He  might,  indeed,  safely  put 
on  an  air  of  magnanimity.  His  enemies  were  doomed. 
It  needed  no  command  from  him  to  decree  their  destruc- 
tion. 

The  withdrawal  from  Cabul  began.  It  was  the  heart  of 
a  cruel  winter.  The  English  had  to  make  their  way 
through  the  awful  pass  of  Koord  Cabul.  This  stupendous 
gorge  runs  for  some  five  miles  between  mountain  ranges  so 


214  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

narrow,  lofty,  and  grim,  that  in  the  winter  season  the 
rays  of  the  sun  can  hardly  pierce  its  darkness  even  at  the 
noontide.  Down  the  centre  dashed  a  precipitous  moun- 
tain torrent  so  fiercely  that  the  stern  frost  of  that  terrible 
time  could  not  stay  its  course.  The  snow  lay  in  masses 
on  the  ground  ;  the  rocks  and  stones  that  raised  their 
heads  above  the  snow  in  the  way  of  the  unfortunate 
travellers  were  slippery  with  frost.  Soon  the  white  snow 
began  to  be  stained  and  splashed  with  blood.  Fearful  as 
this  Koord  Cabul  Pass  was,  it  was  only  a  degree  worse 
than  the  road  which  for  two  whole  days  the  English  had 
to  traverse  to  reach  it.  The  army  which  set  out  from 
Cabul  numbered  more  than  four  thousand  fighting  men — 
of  whom  Europeans,  it  should  be  said,  formed  but  a  small 
proportion — and  some  twelve  thousand  camp  followers  of 
all  kinds.  There  were  also  many  women  and  children. 
Lady  Macnaghteu,  widow  of  the  murdered  envoy ;  Lady 
Sale,  whose  gallant  husband  was  holding  Jellalabad,  at 
the  near  end  of  the  Khyber  Pass,  toward  the  Indian  fron- 
tier ;  Mrs.  Stuart,  her  daughter,  soon  to  be  widowed  by 
the  death  of  her  young  husband ;  Mrs.  Trevor  and  her 
seven  children,  and  many  other  pitiable  fugitives.  The 
winter  journey  would  have  been  cruel  and  dangerous 
enough  in  time  of  peace ;  but  this  journey  had  to  be  ac- 
complished in  the  midst  of  something  far  worse  than 
common  war.  At  every  step  of  the  road,  every  opening 
of  the  rocks,  the  unhappy  crowd  of  confused  and  heteroge- 
neous fugitives  were  beset  by  bands  of  savage  fanatics, 
who  with  their  long  guns  and  long  knives  were  murdering 
all  they  could  reach.  It  was  all  the  way  a  confused  con- 
stant battle  against  a  guerilla  enemy  of  the  most  furious 
and  merciless  temper,  who  were  perfectly  familiar  with 
the  ground,  and  could  rush  forward  and  retire  exactly  as 
suited  their  tactics.  The  English  soldiers,  weary,  weak, 
and  crippled  by  frost,  could  make  but  a  poor  fight  against 


THE  DISASTERS  OF  CABUL.  215 

the  savage  Afghans.  "  It  was  no  longer,"  says  Sir  J.  W. 
Kaye,  "a  retreating  army;  it  was  a  rabble  in  chaotic 
flight."  Men,  women,  and  children,  horses,  ponies,  camels, 
the  wounded,  the  dying,  the  dead,  all  crowded  together 
in  almost  inextricable  confusion  among  the  snow  and 
amidst  the  relentless  enemies.  "  The  massacre  " — to  quote 
again  from  Sir  J.  W.  Kaye,  "  was  fearful  in  this  Koord 
Cabul  Pass.  Three  thousand  men  are  said  to  have  fallen 
under  the  fire  of  the  enemy,  or  to  have  dropped  down  par- 
alyzed and  exhausted,  to  be  slaughtered  by  the  Afghan 
knives.  And  amidst  these  fearful  scenes  of  carnage, 
through  a  shower  of  match-lock  balls,  rode  English  ladies 
on  horseback  or  in  camel-panniers,  sometimes  vainly 
endeavoring  to  keep  their  children  beneath  their  eyes,  and 
losing  them  in  the  confusion  and  bewilderment  of  the 
desolating  march." 

Was  it  for  this,  then,  that  our  troops  had  been  induced 
to  capitulate?  Was  this  the  safe-conduct  which  the 
Afghan  chiefs  had  promised  in  return  for  their  accepting 
the  ignominious  conditions  imposed  on  them  ?  Some  of 
the  chiefs  did  exert  themselves  to  their  utmost  to  protect 
the  unfortunate  English.  It  is  not  certain  what  the  real 
wish  of  Akbar  Khan  may  have  been.  He  protested  that 
he  had  no  power  to  restrain  the  hordes  of  fanatical 
Ghilzyes  whose  own  immediate  chiefs  had  not  authority 
enough  to  keep  them  from  murdering  the  English  when- 
ever they  got  a  chance.  The  force  of  some  few  hundred 
horsemen  whom  Akbar  Khan  had  with  him  were  utterly 
incapable,  he  declared,  of  maintaining  order  among  such 
a  mass  of  infuriated  and  lawless  savages.  Akbar  Khan 
constantly  appeared  on  the  scene  during  this  journey  of 
terror.  At  every  opening  or  break  of  the  long  straggling 
flight  he  and  his  little  band  of  followers  showed  them- 
selves on  the  horizon :  trying  still  to  protect  the  English 
from  utter  ruin,  as  he  declared ;  come  to  gloat  over  their 


216  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

misery,  and  to  see  that  it  was  surely  accomplished,  some 
of  the  unhappy  English  were  ready  to  believe.  Yet  his 
presence  was  something  that  seemed  to  give  a  hope  of 
protection.  Akbar  Khan  at  length  startled  the  English 
by  a  proposal  that  the  women  and  children  who  were  with 
the  army  should  be  handed  over  to  his  custody  to  be  con- 
veyed by  him  in  safety  to  Peshawur.  There  was  nothing 
better  to  be  done.  The  only  modification  of  his  request, 
or  command,  that  could  be  obtained  was  that  the  husbands 
of  the  married  ladies  should  accompany  their  wives.  With 
this  agreement  the  women  and  children  were  handed  over 
to  the  care  of  this  dreaded  enemy,  and  Lady  Macnaghten 
had  to  undergo  the  agony  of  a  personal  interview  with 
the  man  whose  own  hand  had  killed  her  husband.  Few 
scenes  in  poetry  or  romance  can  surely  be  more  thrilling 
with  emotion  than  such  a  meeting  as  this  must  have  been. 
Akbar  Khan  was  kindly  in  his  language,  and  declared  to 
the  unhappy  widow  that  he  would  give  his  right  arm  to 
undo,  if  it  were  possible,  the  deed  that  he  had  done. 

The  women  and  children  and  the  married  men  whose 
wives  were  among  this  party  were  taken  from  the  unfor- 
tunate army  and  placed  under  the  care  of  Akbar  Khan. 
As  events  turned  out,  this  proved  a  fortunate  thing  for 
them.  But  in  any  case  it  was  the  best  thing  that  could 
be  done.  Not  one  of  these  women  and  children  could  have 
lived  through  the  horrors  of  the  journey  which  lay  before 
the  remnant  of  what  had  once  been  a  British  force.  The 
march  was  resumed ;  new  horrors  set  in ;  new  heaps  of 
corpses  stained  the  snow ;  and  then  Akbar  Khan  presented 
himself  with  a  fresh  proposition.  In  the  treaty  made  at 
Cabul  between  the  English  authorities  and  the  Afghan 
chiefs  there  was  an  article  which  stipulated  that  "the 
English  force  at  Jellalabad  shall  march  for  Peshawur 
before  the  Cabul  army  arrives,  and  shall  not  delay  on  the 
road."  Akbar  Khan  was  especially  anxious  to  get  rid  of 


TI1E  DISASTERS  OF  CABUL.  217 

the  little  army  at  Jellalabad,  at  the  near  end  of  the 
Khyber  Pass.  He  desired  above  all  things  that  it  should 
be  on  the  march  home  to  India ;  either  that  it  might  be  out 
of  his  way,  or  that  he  might  have  a  chance  of  destroying 
it  on  its  way.  It  was  in  great  measure  as  a  security  for 
its  moving  that  he  desired  to  have  the  women  and  children 
under  his  care.  It  is  not  likely  that  he  meant  any  harm 
to  the  women  and  children ;  it  must  be  remembered  that 
his  father  and  many  of  the  women  of  his  family  were 
under  the  control  of  the  British  Government  as  prisoners 
in  Hindostan.  But  he  fancied  that  if  he  had  the  English 
women  in  his  hands  the  army  at  Jellalabad  could  not 
refuse  to  obey  the  condition  set  down  in  the  article  of  the 
treaty.  Now  that  he  had  the  women  in  his  power,  how- 
ever, he  demanded  other  guarantees  with  openly  acknowl- 
edged purpose  of  keeping  these  latter  until  Jellalabad 
should  have  been  evacuated.  He  demanded  that  General 
Elphinstone,  the  commander,  with  his  second  in  command, 
and  also  one  other  officer,  should  hand  themselves  over  to 
him  as  hostages.  He  promised,  if  this  were  done,  to  exert 
himself  more  than  before  to  restrain  the  fanatical  tribes, 
and  also  to  provide  the  army  hi  the  Koord  Cabul  Pass 
with  provisions.  There  was  nothing  for  it  but  to  submit ; 
and  the  English  general  himself  became,  with  the  women 
and  children,  a  captive  in  the  hands  of  the  inexorable 
enemy. 

Then  the  march  of  the  army,  without  a  general,  went 
on  again.  Soon  it  became  the  story  of  a  general  without 
an  army ;  before  very  long  there  was  neither  general  nor 
army.  It  is  idle  to  lengthen  a  tale  of  mere  horrors.  The 
straggling  remnant  of  an  army  entered  the  Jugdulluk 
Pass — a  dark,  steep,  narrow,  ascending  path  between  crags. 
The  miserable  toilers  found  that  the  fanatical,  implacable 
tribes  had  barricaded  the  pass.  All  was  over.  The  army 
of  Cabul  was  finally  extinguished  hi  that  barricaded  pass. 


218  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

It  was  a  trap ;  the  British  were  taken  in  it.  A  few  mere 
fugitives  escaped  from  the  scene  of  actual  slaughter,  and 
were  on  the  road  to  Jellalabad,  where  Sale  and  his  little 
army  were  holding  their  own.  When  they  were  within 
sixteen  miles  of  Jellalabad  the  number  was  reduced  to 
six.  Of  these  six,  five  were  killed  by  straggling  maraud- 
ers on  the  way.  One  man  alone  reached  Jellalabad  to 
tell  the  tale.  Literally  one  man,  Dr.  Brydon,  came  to 
Jellalabad  out  of  a  moving  host  which  had  numbered  in 
all  some  sixteen  thousand  when  it  set  out  on  its  march. 
The  curious  eye  will  search  through  history  or  fiction  in 
vain  for  any  picture  more  thrilling  with  the  suggestions 
of  an  awful  catastrophe  than  that  of  this  solitary  survivor, 
faint  and  reeling  on  his  jaded  horse,  as  he  appeared  under 
the  walls  of  Jellalabad,  to  bear  the  tidings  of  our  Ther- 
mopylae of  pain  and  shame. 

This  is  the  crisis  of  the  story.  With  this,  at  least,  the 
worst  of  the  pain  and  shame  were  destined  to  end.  The 
rest  is  all,  so  far  as  we  are  concerned,  reaction  and  recov- 
ery. Our  successes  are  common  enough;  we  may  tell 
their  tale  briefly  in  this  instance.  The  garrison  at  Jella- 
labad had  received,  before  Dr.  Brydon's  arrival,  an  inti- 
mation that  they  were  to  go  out  and  march  toward  India 
in  accordance  with  the  terms  of  the  treaty  extorted  from' 
Elphinstone  at  Cabul.  They  very  properly  declined  to  be 
bound  by  a  treaty  which,  as  General  Sale  rightly  conject- 
ured had  been  "  forced  from  our  envoy  and  military  com- 
mander with  the  knives  at  their  throats."  General  Sale's 
determination  was  clear  and  simple.  "  I  propose  to  hold 
this  place  on  the  part  of  Government  until  I  receive  its 
order  to  the  contrary."  This  resolve  of  Sale's  was  really 
the  turning-point  of  the  history.  Sale  held  Jellalabad ; 
Nott  was  at  Candahar.  Akbar  Khan  besieged  Jellalabad. 
Nature  seemed  to  have  declared  herself  emphatically  on 
his  side,  for  a  succession  of  earthquake  shocks  shattered 


THE  DISASTERS  OF  CABUL.  219 

the  walls  of  the  place,  and  produced  more  terrible  de- 
struction than  the  most  formidable  guns  of  modern  warfare 
could  have  done.  But  the  garrison  held  out  fearlessly ; 
they  restored  the  parapets,  re-established  every  battery, 
re-trenched  the  whole  of  the  gates,  and  built  up  all  the 
breaches.  They  resisted  every  attempt  of  Akbar  Khan  to 
advance  upon  their  works,  and  at  length,  when  it  became 
certain  that  General  Pollock  was  forcing  the  Khyber  Pass 
to  come  to  their  relief,  they  determined  to  attack  Akbar 
Khan's  army  ;  they  issued  boldly  out  of  their  forts,  forced 
a  battle  on  the  Afghan  chief,  and  completely  defeated 
him.  Before  Pollock,  having  gallantly  fought  his  way 
through  the  Khyber  Pass,  had  'reached  Jellalabad,  the 
beleaguering  army  had  been  entirely  defeated  and  dis- 
persed. General  Nott  at  Candahar  was  ready  now  to  co- 
operate with  General  Sale  and  General  Pollock  for  any 
movement  on  Cabul  which  the  authorities  might  advise 
or  sanction.  Meanwhile  the  unfortunate  Shah  Soojah, 
whom  we  had  restored  with  so  much  pomp  of  announce- 
ment to  the  throne  of  his  ancestors,  was  dead.  He  was 
assassinated  in  Cabul,  soon  after  the  departure  of  the 
British,  by  the  orders  of  some  of  the  chiefs  who  detested 
him ;  and  his  body,  stripped  of  its  royal  robes  and  its  many 
jewels,  was  flung  into  a  ditch.  Historians  quarrel  a  good 
deal  over  the  question  of  his  sincerity  and  fidelity  in  his 
dealings  with  us.  It  is  not  likely  that  an  Oriental  of  his 
temperament  and  his  weakness  could  have  been  capable 
of  any  genuine  and  unmixed  loyalty  to  the  English  stran- 
gers. It  seems  to  us  probable  enough  that  he  may  at  im- 
portant moments  have  wavered  and  even  faltered,  glad  to 
take  advantage  of  any  movement  that  might  safely  rid 
him  of  us,  and  yet,  on  the  whole,  preferring  our  friend- 
ship and  our  protection  to  the  tender  mercies  which  he 
was  doomed  to  experience  when  our  troops  had  left  him. 
But  if  we  ask  concerning  his  gratitude  to  us,  it  may  be' 


220  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

well  also  to  ask  what  there  was  in  our  conduct  toward  him 
which  called  for  any  enthusiastic  display  of  gratitude.  We 
did  not  help  him  out  of  any  love  for  him,  or  any  concern 
for  the  justice  of  his  cause.  It  served  us  to  have  a  pup- 
pet, and  we  took  him  when  it  suited  us.  We  also  aban- 
doned him  when  it  suited  us.  As  Lady  Teazle  pro- 
poses to  do  with  honor  in  her  conference  with  Joseph 
Surface,  so  we  ought  to  do  with  gratitude  in  discussing 
the  merits  of  Shah  Soojah — leave  it  out  of  the  question. 
What  Shah  Soojah  owed  to  us  was  a  few  weeks  of  idle 
pomp  and  absurd  dreams,  a  bitter  awakening,  and  a 
shameful  death. 

During  this  time  a  new  Governor-general  had  arrived 
in  India.  Lord  Auckland's  time  had  run  out,  and  during 
its  latter  months  he  had  become  nerveless  and  despond- 
ent because  of  the  utter  failure  of  the  policy  which,  in  an 
evil  hour  for  himself  and  his  country,  he  had  been 
induced  to  undertake.  It  does  not  seem  that  it  ever  was 
at  heart  a  policy  of  his  own,  and  he  knew  that  the  East 
India  Company  were  altogether  opposed  to  it.  The  com- 
pany were  well  aware  of  the  vast  expense  which  our  enter- 
prises in  Afghanistan  must  impose  on  the  revenues  of 
India,  and  they  looked  forward  eagerly  to  the  earliest 
opportunity  of  bringing  it  to  a  close.  Lord  Auckland  had 
been  persuaded  into  adopting  it  against  his  better  judg- 
ment, and  against  even  the  whisperings  of  his  conscience ; 
and  now  he  too  longed  to  be  done  with  it ;  but  he  wished 
to  leave  Afghanistan  as  a  magnanimous  conqueror.  He 
had  in  his  own  person  discounted  the  honors  of  victory. 
He  had  received  an  earldom  for  the  services  he  was  pre- 
sumed to  have  rendered  to  his  sovereign  and  his  country. 
He  had,  therefore,  in  full  sight  that  mournful  juxtaposi- 
tion of  incongruous  objects  which  a  great  English  writer 
has  described  so  touchingly  and  tersely — the  trophies  of 
victory  and  the  battle  lost.  He  was  an  honorable,  kindly 


THE  DISASTERS  OF  CABUL.  221 

gentleman,  and  the  news  of  all  the  successive  calamities 
fell  upon  him  with  a  crushing,  an  overwhelming  weight. 
In  plain  language,  the  Governor-general  lost  his  head. 
He  seemed  to  have  no  other  idea  than  that  of  getting  all 
our  troops  as  quickly  as  might  be  out  of  Afghanistan,  and 
shaking  the  dust  of  the  place  off  our  feet  forever.  It  may 
be  doubted  whether,  if  we  had  pursued  such  a  policy  as 
this,  we  might  not  as  well  have  left  India  itself  once  for 
all.  If  we  had  allowed  it  to  seem  clear  to  the  Indian  popu- 
lations and  princes  that  we  could  be  driven  out  of  Af- 
ghanistan with  humiliation  and  disaster,  and  that  we  were 
unable  or  afraid  to  strike  one  blow  to  redeem  our  military 
credit,  we  should  before  long  have  seen  in  Hindostan 
many  an  attempt  to  enact  there  the  scenes  of  Cabul  and 
Candahar.  Unless  a  moralist  is  prepared  to  say  that  a 
nation  which  has  committed  one  error  of  policy  is  bound 
in  conscience  to  take  all  the  worst  and  most  protracted 
consequences  of  that  error,  and  never  make  any  attempt 
to  protect  itself  against  them,  even  a  moralist  of  the 
most  scrupulous  character  can  hardly  deny  that  we  were 
bound,  for  the  sake  of  our  interests  in  Europe  as  well  as 
in  India,  to  prove  that  our  strength  had  not  been  broken 
nor  our  counsels  paralyzed  by  the  disasters  in  Afghanis- 
tan. Yet  Lord  Auckland  does  not  appear  to  have  thought 
anything  of  the  kind  either  needful  or  within  the  compass 
of  our  national  strength.  He  was,  in  fact,  a  broken  man. 
His  successor  came  out  with  the  brightest  hopes  of 
India  and  the  world,  founded  on  his  energy  and  strength 
of  mind.  The  successor  was  Lord  Ellenborough,  the  son 
of  that  Edward  Law,  afterward  Lord  Ellenborough,  Chief- 
justice  of  the  King's  Bench,  who  had  been  leading  counsel 
for  "Warren  Hastings  when  the  latter  was  impeached 
before  the  House  of  Lords.  The  second  Ellenborough 
was,  at  the  time  of  his  appointment,  filling  the  office  of 
President  of  the  Board  of  Control,  an  office  he  had  held 


222  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

before.  He  was  therefore  well  acquainted  with  the  affairs 
of  India.  He  had  come  into  office  under  Sir  Robert  Peel 
on  the  resignation  of  the  Melbourne  Ministry.  He  was 
looked  upon  as  a  man  of  great  ability  and  energy.  It  was 
known  that  his  personal  predilections  were  for  the  career 
of  a  soldier.  He  was  fond  of  telling  his  hearers  then  and 
since  that  the  life  of  a  camp  was  that  which  he  should 
have  loved  to  lead.  He  was  a  man  of  great  and,  in  certain 
lights,  apparently  splendid  abilities.  There  was  a  certain 
Orientalism  about  his  language,  his  aspirations,  and  his 
policy.  He  loved  gorgeousness  and  dramatic — ill-natured 
persons  said  theatric — effects.  Life  arranged  itself  in  his 
eyes  as  a  superb  and  showy  pageant,  of  which  it  would 
have  been  his  ambition  to  form  the  central  figure.  His 
eloquence  was  often  of  a  lofty  and  noble  order.  Men  who 
are  still  hardly  of  middle  age  can  remember  Lord  Ellen- 
borough  on  great  occasions  in  the  House  of  Lords,  and 
can  recollect  their  having  been  deeply  impressed  by  him, 
even  though  they  had  but  lately  heard  such  speakers  as 
Gladstone  or  Bright  in  the  other  House.  It  was  not  easy, 
indeed,  sometimes  to  avoid  the  conviction  that  in  listen- 
ing to  Lord  Ellenborough  one  was  listening  to  a  really 
great  orator  of  a  somewhat  antique  and  stately  type,  who 
attuned  his  speech  to  the  pitch  of  an  age  of  loftier  and 
less  prosaic  aims  than  ours.  When  he  had  a  great  ques- 
tion to  deal  with,  and  when  his  instincts,  if  not  his  reason- 
ing power,  had  put  him  on  the  right  or  at  least  the  effec- 
tive side  of  it,  he  could  speak  in  a  tone  of  poetic  and 
elevated  eloquence  to  which  it  was  impossible  to  listen 
without  emotion.  But  if  Lord  Ellenborough  was  in  some 
respects  a  man  of  genius,  he  was  also  a  man  whose  love 
of  mere  effects  often  made  him  seem  like  a  quack.  There 
are  certain  characters  in  which  a  little  of  unconscious 
quackery  is  associated  with  some  of  the  elements  of 
true  genius.  Lord  Ellenborough  was  one  of  these.  Far 


THE  DISASTERS  OF  CABUL.  223 

greater  men  than  he  must  be  associated  in  the  same 
category.  The  elder  Pitt,  the  first  Napoleon,  Mirabeau, 
Bolingbroke,  and  many  others,  were  men  in  whom  un- 
doubtedly some  of  the  charlatan  was  mixed  up  with  some 
of  the  very  highest  qualities  of  genius.  In  Lord  Ellenbor- 
ough  this  blending  was  strongly  and  sometimes  even 
startlingly  apparent.  To  this  hour  there  are  men  who 
knew  him  well  in  public  and  private  on  whom  his  weak- 
nesses made  so  disproportionate  an  impression  that  they 
can  see  in  him  little  more  than  a  mere  charlatan.  This  is 
entirely  unjust.  He  was  a  man  of  great  abilities  and 
earnestness,  who  had  in  him  a  strange  dash  of  the  play- 
actor, who  at  the  most  serious  moment  of  emergency 
always  thought  of  how  to  display  himself  effectively,  and 
who  would  have  met  the  peril  of  an  empire,  as  poor  Nar- 
cissa  met  death,  with  an  overmastering  desire  to  show  to 
the  best  personal  advantage. 

Lord  Ellenborough's  appointment  was  hailed  by  all  par- 
ties in  India  as  the  most  auspicious  that  could  be  made. 
Here,  people  said,  is  surely  the  great  stage  for  a  great 
actor ;  and  now  the  great  actor  is  coming.  There  would 
be  something  fascinating  to  a  temper  like  his  in  the 
thought  of  redeeming  the  military  honor  of  his  country 
and  standing  out  in  history  as  the  avenger  of  the  shames 
of  Cabul.  But  those  who  thought  in  this  way  found  them- 
selves suddenly  disappointed.  Lord  Ellenborough  uttered 
and  wrote  a  few  showy  sentences  about  revenging  our 
losses  and  "re-establishing  in  all  its  original  brilliancy 
our  military  character."  But  when  he  had  done  this  he 
seemed  to  have  relieved  his  mind  and  to  have  done 
enough.  With  him  there  was  a  constant  tendency  to 
substitute  grandiose  phrases  for  deeds ;  or  perhaps  to 
think  that  the  phrase  was  the  thing  of  real  moment.  He 
said  these  fine  words,  and  then  at  once  he  announced  that 
the  only  object  of  the  Government  was  to  get  the  troops 


224  A  IIISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

out  of  Afghanistan  as  quickly  as  might  be,  and  almost  on 
any  terms.  The  whole  of  Lord  Ellenborough's  conduct 
during  this  crisis  is  inexplicable,  except  on  the  assump- 
tion that  he  really  did  not  know  at  certain  times  how  to 
distinguish  between  phrases  and  actions.  A  general  out- 
cry was  raised  in  India  and  among  the  troops  in  Afghan- 
istan against  the  extraordinary  policy  which  Lord  Ellen- 
borough  propounded.  Englishmen,  in  fact,  refused  to  be- 
lieve in  it ;  took  it  as  something  that  must  be  put  aside. 
English  soldiers  could  not  believe  that  they  were  to  be 
recalled  after  defeat;  they  persisted  in  the  conviction 
that,  let  the  Governor-general  say  what  he  might,  his  in- 
tention must  be  that  the  army  should  retrieve  its  fame 
and  retire  only  after  complete  victory.  The  Governor- 
general  himself  after  awhile  quietly  acted  on  this  inter- 
pretation of  his  meaning.  He  allowed  the  military  com- 
manders in  Afghanistan  to  pull  their  resources  together 
and  prepare  for  inflicting  signal  chastisement  on  the 
enemy.  They  were  not  long  in  doing  this.  They  en- 
countered the  enemy  wherever  he  showed  himself  and 
defeated  him.  They  recaptured  town  after  town,  until  at 
length,  on  September  15th,  1842,  General  Pollock's  force 
entered  Cabul.  A  few  days  after,  as  a  lasting  mark  of 
retribution  for  the  crimes  which  had  been  committed 
there,  the  British  commander  ordered  the  destruction  of 
the  great  bazar  of  Cabul,  where  the  mangled  remains  of 
the  unfortunate  envoy  Macnaghten  had  been  exhibited  in 
brutal  triumph  and  joy  to  the  Afghan  populace. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  enter  into  detailed  descriptions  of 
the  successful  progress  of  our  arms.  The  war  may  Joe 
regarded  as  over.  It  is,  however,  necessary  to  say  some- 
thing of  the  fate  of  the  captives,  or  hostages,  who  were 
hurried  away  that  terrible  January  night  at  the  com- 
mand of  Akbar  Khan.  One  thing  has  first  to  be  told 
which  some  may  now  receive  with  incredulity,  but  which 


THE  DISASTERS  OF  CABUL.  225 

is,  nevertheless,  true — there  was  a  British  general  who  was 
disposed  to  leave  them  to  their  fate  and  take  no  trouble 
about  them,  and  who  declared  himself  under  the  convic- 
tion, from  the  tenor  of  all  Lord  Ellenborough's  despatches, 
that  the  recovery  of  the  prisoners  was  "  a  matter  of 
indifference  to  the  Government."  There  seems  to  have 
been  some  unhappy  spell  working  against  us  in  all  this 
chapter  of  our  history,  by  virtue  of  which  even  its  most 
brilliant  pages  were  destined  to  have  something  ignoble 
or  ludicrous  written  on  them.  Better  counsels,  however, 
prevailed.  General  Pollock  insisted  on  an  effort  being 
made  to  recover  the  prisoners  before  the  troops  began  to 
return  to  India,  and  he  appointed  to  this  noble  duty  the 
husband  of  one  of  the  hostage  ladies — Sir  Robert  Sale. 
The  prisoners  were  recovered  with  greater  ease  than  \vas 
expected — so  many  of  them  as  were  yet  alive.  Poor  Gen- 
eral Elphinstone  had  long  before  succumbed  to  disease 
and  hardship.  The  ladies  had  gone  through  strange  pri- 
vations. Thirty-six  years  ago  the  tale  of  the  captivity  of 
Lady  Sale  and  her  companions  was  in  every  mouth  all 
over  England ;  nor  did  any  civilized  land  fail  to  take  an 
interest  in  the  strange  and  pathetic  story.  They  were 
hurried  from  fort  to  fort  as  the  designs  and  the  fortunes 
of  Akbar  Khan  dictated  his  disposal  of  them.  They  suf- 
fered almost  every  fierce  alternation  of  cold  and  heat. 
They  had  to  live  on  the  coarsest  fare ;  they  were  lodged  in  a 
manner  which  would  have  made  the  most  wretched  prison 
accommodation  of  a  civilized  country  seem  luxurious  by 
comparison;  they  were  in  constant  uncertainty  and 
fear,  not  knowing  what  might  befall.  Yet  they  seem  to 
have  held  up  their  courage  and  spirits  wonderfully  well, 
and  to  have  kept  the  hearts  of  the  children  alive  with 
mirth  and  sport  at  moments  of  the  utmost  peril.  Gradu- 
ally it  became  more  and  more  suspected  that  the  fortunes 
of  Akbar  Khan  were  falling.  At  last  it  was  beyond 

15 


226  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

doubt  that  he  had  been  completely  defeated.  Then  they 
were  hurried  away  again,  they  knew  not  whither, 
through  ever-ascending  mountain-passes,  under  a  scorch- 
ing sun.  They  were  being  carried  off  to  the  wild,  rugged 
regions  of  the  Indian  Caucasus.  They  were  bestowed  in 
a  miserable  fort  at  Bameean.  They  were  now  under  the 
charge  of  one  of  Akbar  Khans  soldiers  of  fortune.  This 
man  had  begun  to  suspect  that  things  were  well-nigh 
hopeless  with  Akbar  Khan.  He  was  induced  by  gradual 
and  very  cautious  approaches  to  enter  into  an  agreement 
with  the  prisoners  for  their  release.  The  English  officers 
signed  an  agreement  with  him  to  secure  him  a  large  re- 
ward and  a  pension  for  life  if  he  enabled  them  to  escape. 
He  accordingly  declared  that  he  renounced  his  allegiance 
to  Akbar  Khan;  all  the  more  readily  seeing  that  news 
came  hi  of  the  chiefs  total  defeat  and  flight,  no  one  knew 
whither.  The  prisoners  and  their  escort,  lately  their 
jailer  and  guards,  set  forth  on  their  way  to  General  Pol- 
lock's camp.  On  their  way  they  met  the  English  parties 
sent  out  to  seek  for  them.  Sir  Robert  Sale  found  his  wife 
again.  "Our  joy,"  says  one  of  the  rescued  prisoners, 
"  was  too  great,  too  overwhelming,  for  tongue  to  utter." 
Description,  indeed,  could  do  nothing  for  the  effect  of 
such  a  meeting  but  to  spoil  it. 

There  is  a  very  different  ending  to  the  episode  of  the 
English  captives  in  Bokhara.  Colonel  Stoddart,  who  had 
been  sent  to  the  Persian  camp  in  the  beginning  of  all  these 
events  to  insist  that  Persia  must  desist  from  the  siege  of 
Herat,  was  sent  subsequently  on  a  mission  to  the  Ameer 
of  Bokhara.  The  Ameer  received  him  favorably  at  first, 
but  afterward  became  suspicious  of  English  designs  of 
conquest,  and  treated  Stoddart  with  marked  indignity. 
The  Ameer  appears  to  have  been  the  very  model  of  a 
melodramatic  Eastern  tyrant.  He  was  cruel  and  capri- 
cious as  another  Caligula,  and  perhaps,  in  truth,  quite  as 


THE  DISASTERS  OF  CABUL.  227 

mad.  He  threw  Stoddart  into  prison.  Captain  Conolly 
was  appointed  two  years  after  to  proceed  to  Bokhara  and 
other  countries  of  the  same  region.  He  undertook  to 
endeavor  to  effect  the  liberation  of  Stoddart,  but  could 
only  succeed  in  sharing  his  sufferings,  and,  at  last,  his 
fate.  The  Ameer  had  written  a  letter  to  the  Queen  of 
England,  and  the  answer  was  written  by  the  Foreign 
Secretary,  referring  the  Ameer  to  the  Governor-general 
of  India.  The  savage  tyrant  redoubled  the  ill-treatment 
of  his  captives.  He  accused  them  of  being  spies  and  of 
giving  help  to  his  enemies.  The  Indian  Government  were 
of  opinion  that  the  envoys  had  in  some  manner  exceeded 
their  instructions,  and  that  Conolly,  in  particular,  had 
contributed  by  indiscretion  to  his  own  fate.  Nothing, 
therefore,  was  done  to  obtain  their  release  beyond  diplo- 
matic efforts,  and  appeals  to  the  magnanimity  of  the 
Ameer,  which  had  not  any  particular  effect.  Dr.  Wolff, 
the  celebrated  traveller  and  missionary,  afterward  under- 
took an  expedition  of  his  own  in  the  hope  of  saving  the 
unfortunate  captives ;  but  he  only  reached  Bokhara  in  time 
to  hear  that  they  had  been  put  to  death.  The  moment  and 
the  actual  manner  of  their  death  cannot  be  known  to 
positive  certainty,  but  there  is  little  doubt  that  they  were 
executed  on  the  same  day  by  the  orders  of  the  Ameer. 
The  journals  of  Conolly  have  been  preserved  up  to  an 
advanced  period  of  his  captivity,  and  they  relieve  so  far 
the  melancholy  of  the  fate  that  fell  on  the  unfortunate 
officers  by  showing  that  the  horrors  of  their  hopeless 
imprisonment  were  so  great  that  their  dearest  friends 
must  have  been  glad  to  know  of  their  release  even  by  the 
knife  of  the  executioner.  It  is  perhaps  not  the  least 
bitter  part  of  the  story  that,  in  the  belief  of  many,  includ- 
ing the  unfortunate  officers  themselves,  the  course  pur- 
sued by  the  English  authorities  in  India  had  done  more 
to  hand  them  over  to  the  treacherous  cruelty  of  their 


228  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

captor  than  to  release  them  from  his  power.  In  truth,  the 
authorities  in  India  had  had  enough  of  intervention.  It 
would  have  needed  a  great  exigency,  indeed,  to  stir  them 
into  energy  of  action  soon  again  in  Central  Asia. 

This  thrilling  chapter  of  English  history  closes  with 
something  like  a  piece  of  harlequinade.  The  curtain  fell 
amidst  general  laughter.  Only  the  genius  of  Lord  Ellen- 
borough  could  have  turned  the  mood  of  India  and  of  Eng- 
land to  mirth  on  such  a  subject.  Lord  Ellenborough  was 
equal  to  this  extraordinary  feat.  '  The  never-to-be-forgot- 
ten proclamation  about  the  restoration  to  India  of  the 
gates  of  the  Temple  of  Somnauth,  redeemed  at  Lord  Ellen- 
borough's  orders  when  Ghuznee  was  retaken  by  the  Eng- 
lish, was  first  received  with  incredulity  as  a  practical  joke ; 
then  with  one  universal  burst  of  laughter;  then  with 
indignation ;  and  then,  again,  when  the  natural  anger  had 
died  away,  with  laughter  again.  "  My  brothers  and  my 
friends,"  wrote  Lord  Ellenborough  "to  all  the  princes, 
chiefs,  and  people  of  India," — "  Our  victorious  army  bears 
the  gates  of  the  Temple  of  Somnauth  in  triumph  from 
Afghanistan,  and  the  despoiled  tomb  of  Sultan  Mahmoud 
looks  upon  the  ruins  of  Ghuznee.  The  insult  of  eight 
hundred  years  is  at  last  avenged.  The  gates  of  the 
Temple  of  Somnauth,  so  long  the  memorial  of  your 
humiliation,  are  become  the  proudest  record  of  your 
national  glory ;  the  proof  of  your  superiority  in  arms  over 
the  nations  beyond  the  Indus." 

No  words  of  pompous  man  could  possibly  have  put  to- 
gether greater  absurdities.  The  brothers  and  friends  were 
Mohammedans  and  Hindoos,  who  were  about  as  likely  to 
agree  as  to  the  effect  of  these  symbols  of  triumph  as  a  Fe- 
nian and  an  Orangeman  would  be  to  fraternize  in  a  toast 
to  the  glorious,  pious,  and  immortal  memory.  To  the  Mo- 
hammedans the  triumph  of  Lord  Ellenborough  was  simply 
an  insult.  To  the  Hindoos  the  offer  was  ridiculous,  for  the 


THE  DISASTERS  OF  CABUL.  229 

Temple  of  Somnauth  itself  was  in  ruins,  and  the  ground 
it  covered  was  trodden  by  Mohammedans.  To  finish  the 
absurdity,  the  gates  proved  not  to  be  genuine  relics  at  all. 
On  October  1st,  1842,  exactly  four  years  since  Lord  Auck- 
land's proclamation  announcing  and  justifying  the  inter- 
vention to  restore  Shah  Soojah,  Lord  Ellenborough  issued 
another  proclamation  announcing  the  complete  failure 
and  the  revocation  of  the  policy  of  his  predecessor.  Lord 
Ellenborough  declared  that  "  to  force  a  sovereign  upon 
a  reluctant  people  would  be  as  inconsistent  with  the  policy 
as  it  is  with  the  principles  of  the  British  Government ; " 
that,  therefore,  they  would  recognize  any  government  ap- 
proved by  the  Afghans  themselves  ;  that  the  British  arms 
would  be  withdrawn  from  Afghanistan,  and  that  the  Gov- 
ernment of  India  would  remain  "  content  with  the  limits 
nature  appears  to  have  assigned  to  its  empire."  Dost 
Mahomed  was  released  from  his  captivity,  and  before  long 
was  ruler  of  Cabul  once  again.  Thus  ended  the  story  of 
our  expedition  to  reorganize  the  internal  condition  of 
Afghanistan.  After  four  years  of  unparalleled  trial  and 
disaster  everything  was  restored  to  the  condition  in  which 
we  found  it,  except  that  there  were  so  many  brave  Eng- 
lishmen sleeping  in  bloody  graves.  The  Duke  of  Wel- 
lington ascribed  the  causes  of  our  failure  to  making  war 
with  a  peace  establishment ;  making  war  without  a  safe 
base  of  operations ;  carrying  the  native  army  out  of  India 
into  a  strange  and  cold  climate ;  invading  a  poor  country 
which  was  unequal  to  the  supply  of  our  wants ;  giving 
undue  power  to  political  agents ;  want  of  forethought  and 
undue  confidence  in  the  Afghans  on  the  part  of  Sir  W. 
Macnaghten ;  placing  our  magazines,  even  our  treasure,  in 
indefensible  places ;  great  military  neglect  and  misman- 
agement after  the  outbreak.  Doubtless  these  were,  in  a 
military  sense,  the  reasons  for  the  failure  of  an  enterprise 
which  cost  the  revenues  of  India  an  enormous  amount  of 


230  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

treasure.  But  the  causes  of  failure  were  deeper  than  any 
military  errors  could  explain.  It  is  doubtful  whether  the 
genius  of  a  Napoleon  and  the  forethought  of  a  Wellington 
could  have  won  any  permanent  success  for  an  enterprise 
founded  on  so  false  and  fatal  a  policy.  Nothing  in  the 
ability  or  devotion  of  those  intrusted  with  the  task  of 
carrying  it  out  could  have  made  it  deserve  success.  Our 
first  error  of  principle  was  to  go  completely  out  of  our 
way  for  the  purpose  of  meeting  mere  speculative  dangers ; 
our  next  and  far  greater  error  was  made  when  we  at- 
tempted, in  the  words  of  Lord  Ellenborough's  proclama- 
tion, to  force  a  sovereign  upon  a  reluctant  people. 


THE  EEPEAL  YEAR.  231 


CHAPTER  XII. 

THE   REPEAL    YEAR. 

"THE  year  1843,"  said  O'Connell,  "is  and  shall  be  the 
great  Repeal  year."  In  the  year  1843,  at  all  events,  O'Con- 
nell and  his  Repeal  agitation  are  entitled  to  the  foremost 
place.  The  character  of  the  man  himself  well  deserves 
some  calm  consideration.  "We  are  now,  perhaps,  in  a  con- 
dition to  do  it  justice.  We  are  far  removed  in  sentiment 
and  political  association,  if  not  exactly  in  years,  from  the 
time  when  O'Connell  was  the  idol  of  one  party,  and  the 
object  of  all  the  bitterest  scorn  and  hatred  of  the  other. 
No  man  of  his  time  was  so  madly  worshipped  and  so 
fiercely  denounced.  No  man  in  our  time  was  ever  the 
object  of  so  much  abuse  in  the  newspapers.  The  fiercest 
and  coarsest  attacks  that  we  can  remember  to  have  been 
made  in  English  journals  on  Cobden  and  Bright  during 
the  heat  of  the  Anti-Corn-law  agitation  seem  placid, 
gentle,  and  almost  complimentary  when  compared  with 
the  criticisms  daily  applied  to  O'Connell.  The  only  vitu- 
peration which  could  equal  in  vehemence  and  scurrility 
that  poured  out  upon  O'Connell  was  that  which  O'Connell 
himself  poured  out  upon  his  assailants.  His  hand  was 
against  every  man,  if  every  man's  hand  was  against  him. 
He  asked  for  no  quarter,  and  he  gave  none. 

We  have  outlived  not  the  times  merely,  but  the  whole 
spirit  of  the  times,  so  far  as  political  controversy  is  con- 
cerned. We  are  now  able  to  recognize  the  fact  that  a 


232  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

public  man  may  hold  opinions  which  are  distasteful  to 
the  majority,  and  yet  be  perfectly  sincere  and  worthy  of 
respect.  We  are  well  aware  that  a  man  may  differ  from 
us,  even  on  vital  questions,  and  yet  be  neither  fool  nor 
knave.  But  this  view  of  things  was  not  generally  taken 
in  the  days  of  O'Connell's  great  agitation.  He  and  his 
enemies  alike  acted  in  their  controversies  9n  the  principle 
that  a  political  opponent  is  necessarily  a  blockhead  or  a 
scoundrel.  It  is  strange  and  somewhat  melancholy  to  read 
the  strictures  of  so  enlightened  a  woman  as  Miss  Martineau 
upon  O'Connell.  They  are  all  based  upon  what  a  humor- 
ous writer  has  called  the  "  fiend-in-human-shape  theory." 
Miss  Martineau  not  merely  assumes  that  O'Connell  was 
absolutely  insincere  and  untrustworthy,  but  discourses  of 
him  on  the  assumption  that  he  was  knowingly  and  pur- 
posely a  villain.  Not  only  does  she  hold  that  his  Repeal 
agitation  was  an  unqualified  evil  for  his  country,  and  that 
Repeal,  if  gained,  would  have  been  a  curse  to  it,  but  she 
insists  that  O'Connell  himself  was  thoroughly  convinced 
of  the  facts.  She  devotes  whole  pages  of  lively  and  acrid 
argument  to  prove  not  only  that  O'Connell  was  ruining 
his  country,  but  that  he  knew  he  was  ruining  it,  and 
persevered  in  his  wickedness  out  of  pure  self-seeking. 
No  writer  possessed  of  one-tenth  of  Miss  Martineau's 
intellect  and  education  would  now  reason  after  that 
fashion  about  any  public  man.  If  there  is  any  common 
delusion  of  past  days  which  may  be  taken  as  entirely 
exploded  now,  it  is  the  idea  that  any  man  ever  swayed 
vast  masses  of  people,  and  became  the  idol  and  the  hero 
of  a  nation,  by  the  strength  of  a  conscious  hypocrisy  and 
imposture. 

O'Connell  in  this  Repeal  year,  as  he  called  it,  was  by  far 
the  most  prominent  politician  in  these  countries  who  had 
never  been  in  office.  He  had  been  the  patron  of  the  Mel- 
bourne Ministry,  and  his  patronage  had  proved  baneful  to 


THE  REPEAL  YEAR.  233 

it.  One  of  the  great  causes  of  the  detestation  in  which 
the  Melbourne  Whigs  were  held  by  a  vast  number  of 
English  people  was  their  alleged  subserviency  to  the  Irish 
agitator.  We  cannot  be  surprised  if  the  English  public 
just  then  was  little  inclined  to  take  an  impartial  esti- 
mate of  O'Connell.  He  had  attacked  some  of  their  public 
men  in  language  of  the  fiercest  denunciation.  He  had 
started  an  agitation  which  seemed  as  if  it  were  directly 
meant  to  bring  about  a  break-up  of  the  Imperial  sys- 
tem so  lately  completed  by  the  Act  of  Union.  He  was 
opposed  to  the  existence  of  the  State  Church  in  Ireland. 
He  was  the  bitter  enemy  of  the  Irish  landlord  class — of 
the  landlords,  that  is  to  say,  who  took  their  title  in  any 
way  from  England.  He  was  familiarly  known  in  the 
graceful  controversy  of  the  time  as  the  "  Big  Beggarman." 
It  was  an  article  of  faith  with  the  general  public  that  he 
was  enriching  himself  at  the  expense  of  a  poor  and  foolish 
people.  It  is  a  matter  of  fact  that  he  had  given  up  a 
splendid  practice  at  the  bar  to  carry  on  his  agitation; 
that  he  lost  by  the  agitation,  pecuniarily,'  far  more  than 
he  ever  got  by  it ;  that  he  had  not  himself  received  from 
first  to  last  anything  like  the  amount  of  the  noble  tribute 
so  becomingly  and  properly  given  to  Mr.  Cobdeu,  and  so 
honorably  accepted  by  him ;  and  that  he  died  poor,  leav- 
ing his  sons  poor.  Indeed,  it  is  a  remarkable  evidence  of 
the  purifying  nature  of  any  great  political  cause,  even 
where  the  object  sought  is  but  a  phantom,  that  it  is 
hardly  possible  to  give  a  single  instance  of  a  great  political 
agitation  carried  on  in  these  countries  and  in  modern  times 
by  leaders  who  had  any  primary  purpose  of  making 
money.  But  at  that  time  the  general  English  public 
were  firmly  convinced  that  O'Connell  was  simply  keeping 
up  his  agitation  for  the  sake  of  pocketing  "the  rent." 
Some  of  the  qualities,  too,  that  specially  endeared  him  to 
his  Celtic  countrymen  made  him  particularly  objectionable 


234  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

to  Englishmen ;  and  Englishmen  have  never  been  famous 
for  readiness  to  enter  into  the  feelings  and  accept  the 
point  of  view  of  other  peoples.  O'Connell  was  a  thorough 
Celt.  He  represented  all  the  impulsiveness,  the  quick- 
changing  emotions,  the  passionate,  exaggerated  loves  and 
hatreds,  the  heedlessness  of  statement,  the  tendency  to 
confound  impressions  with  facts,  the  ebullient  humor — all 
the  other  qualities  that  are  especially  characteristic  of 
the  Celt.  The  Irish  people  were  the  audience  to  which 
O'Connell  habitually  played.  It  may,  indeed,  be  said 
that  even  in  playing  to  this  audience  he  commonly  played 
to  the  gallery.  As  the  orator  of  a  popular  assembly,  as 
the  orator  of  a  monster  meeting,  he  probably  never  had 
an  equal  in  these  countries.  He  had  many  of  the  physical 
endowments  that  are  especially  favorable  to  success  in 
such  a  sphere.  He  had  a  herculean  frame,  a  stately 
presence,  a  face  capable  of  expressing  easily  and  effec- 
tively the  most  rapid  alternations  of  mood,  and  a  voice 
which  all  hearers  admit  to  have  been  almost  unrivalled  for 
strength  and  sweetness.  Its  power,  its  pathos,  its  passion, 
its  music  have  been  described  in  words  of  positive  rapture 
by  men  who  detested  O'Connell,  and  who  would  rather,  if 
they  could,  have  denied  to  him  any  claim  on  public  atten- 
tion, even  in  the  matter  of  voice.  He  spoke  without 
studied  preparation,  and  of  course  had  all  the  defects  of 
such  a  style.  He  fell  into  repetition  and  into  carelessness 
of  construction ;  he  was  hurried  away  into  exaggeration 
and  sometimes  into  mere  bombast.  But  he  had  all  the 
peculiar  success,  too,  which  rewards  the  orator  who  can 
speak  without  preparation.  He  always  spoke  right  to 
the  hearts  of  his  hearers.  On  the  platform  or  in  Parlia- 
ment, whatever  he  said  was  said  to  his  audience,  and  was 
never  hi  the  nature  of  a  discourse  delivered  over  their 
heads.  He  entered  the  House  of  Commons  when  he  was 
nearly  fifty-four  years  of  age.  Most  persons  supposed 


THE  REPEAL  YEAR.  235 

that  the  style  of  speaking  he  had  formed,  first  in  address- 
ing juries,  and  next  in  rousing  Irish  mobs,  must  cause 
his  failure  when  he  came  to  appeal  to  the  unsympathetic 
and  fastidious  House  of  Commons.  But  it  is  certain  that 
O'Connell  became  one  of  the  most  successful  Parliament- 
ary orators  of  his  time.  Lord  Jeffrey,  a  professional  critic, 
declared  that  all  other  speakers  in  the  House  seemed  to 
him  only  talking  school-boy  talk  after  he  had  heard 
O'Connell.  No  man  we  now  know  of  is  less  likely  to  be 
carried  away  by  any  of  the  clap-trap  arts  of  a  false 
demagogic  style  than  Mr.  Roebuck;  and  Mr.  Roebuck 
has  said  that  he  considers  O'Connell  the  greatest  orator 
he  ever  heard  in  the  House  of  Commons.  Charles  Dickens, 
when  a  reporter  in  the  gallery,  where  he  had  few  equals, 
if  any,  in  his  craft,  put  down  his  pencil  once  when 
engaged  in  reporting  a  speech  of  O'Connell's  on  one  of 
the  tithe  riots  in  Ireland,  and  declared  that  he  could  not 
take  notes  of  the  speech,  so  moved  was  he  by  its  pathos. 
Lord  Beaconsfield,  who  certainly  had  no  great  liking  for 
O'Connell,  has  spoken  in  terms  as  high  as  any  one  could 
use  about  his  power  over  the  House.  But  O'Connell's 
eloquence  only  helped  him  to  make  all  the  more  enemies 
in  the  House  of  Commons.  He  was  reckless  even  there  in 
his  denunciation,  although  he  took  care  never  to  obtrude 
on  Parliament  the  extravagant  and  unmeaning  abuse  of 
opponents  which  delighted  the  Irish  mob  meetings. 

O'Connell  was  a  crafty  and  successful  lawyer.  The 
Irish  peasant,  like  the  Scottish,  is,  or  at  least  then  was, 
remarkably  fond  of  litigation.  He  delighted  in  the  quirks 
and  quibbles  of  law,  and  in  the  triumphs  won  by  the  skill 
of  lawyers  over  opponents.  He  admired  O'Connell  all  the 
more  when  O'Connell  boasted  and  proved  that  he  could 
drive  a  coach  and  six  through  any  Act  of  Parliament. 
One  of  the  pet  heroes  of  Irish  legend  is  a  personage  whose 
cleverness  and  craft  procure  for  him  a  sobriquet  which  has 


236  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

been  rendered  into  English  by  the  words  "  twists  upon 
twists  and  tricks  upon  tricks."  O'Connell  was  in  the  eyes 
of  many  of  the  Irish  peasantry  an  embodiment  of  "  twists 
upon  twists  and  tricks  upon  tricks,"  enlisted  in  their  cause 
for  the  confusion  of  their  adversaries.  He  had  borne  the 
leading  part  in  carrying  Catholic  emancipation.  He  had 
encountered  all  the  danger  and  responsibility  of  the  some- 
what aggressive  movement  by  which  it  was  finally  secured. 
It  is  true  that  it  was  a  reform  which  in  the  course  of  civil- 
ization must  have  been  carried.  It  had  in  its  favor  all 
the  enlightenment  of  the  time.  The  eloquence  of  the 
greatest  orators,  the  intellect  of  the  truest  philosophers, 
the  prescience  of  the  wisest  statesmen  had  pleaded  for  it 
and  helped  to  make  its  way  clear.  Xo  man  can  doubt 
that  it  must  in  a  short  time  have  been  carried  if  O'Con- 
nell had  never  lived.  But  it  was  carried  just  then  by 
virtue  of  O'Connell's  bold  agitation,  and  by  the  wise  resolve 
of  the  Tory  Government  not  to  provoke  a  civil  war.  It  is 
deeply  to  be  regretted  that  Catholic  emancipation  was  not 
conceded  to  the  claims  of  justice.  Had  it  been  so  yielded, 
it  is  very  doubtful  whether  we  should  ever  have  heard 
much  of  the  Repeal  agitation.  But  the  Irish  people  saw, 
and  indeed  all  the  world  was  made  aware  of  the  fact, 
that  emancipation  would  not  have  been  conceded,  just  then 
at  least,  but  for  the  fear  of  civil  disturbance.  To  an  Eng- 
lishman looking  coolly  back  from  a  distance,  the  difference 
is  clear  between  granting  to-day,  rather  than  provoke  dis- 
turbance, that  which  every  one  sees  must  be  granted 
some  time,  and  conceding  what  the  vast  majority  of  the 
English  people  believe  can  never  with  propriety  or  even 
safety  be  granted  at  all.  But  we  can  hardly  wonder  if 
the  Irish  peasant  did  not  make  such  distinctions.  All  he 
knew  was  that  O'Connell  had  demanded  Catholic  eman- 
cipation, and  had  been  answered  at  first  by  a  direct  refusal ; 
that  he  had  said  he  would  compel  its  concession,  and  that 


DANIEL  D' 


THE  REPEAL  YEAR.  237 

in  the  end  it  was  conceded  to  him.  When,  therefore, 
O'Connell  said  that  he  would  compel  the  Government  to 
give  him  repeal  of  the  Union,  the  Irish  peasant  naturally 
believed  that  he  could  keep  his  word. 

Nor  is  there  any  reason  to  doubt  that  O'Connell  him- 
self believed  in  the  possibility  of  accomplishing  his  pur- 
pose. We  are  apt  now  to  think  of  the  union  between 
England  and  Ireland  as  of  time-honored  endurance.  It 
had  been  scarcely  thirty  years  in  existence  when  O'Con- 
nell entered  Parliament.  The  veneration  of  ancient  line- 
age, the  majesty  of  custom,  the  respect  due  to  the  "  wisdom 
of  our  ancestors  " — none  of  these  familiar  claims  could  be 
urged  on  behalf  of  the  legislative  union  between  England 
and  Ireland.  To  O'Connell  it  appeared  simply  as  a  modern 
innovation  which  had  nothing  to  be  said  for  it  except 
that  a  majority  of  Englishmen  had  by  threats  and  bribery 
forced  it  on  a  majority  of  Irishmen.  Mr.  Lecky,  the  author 
of  the  "  History  of  European  Morals,"  may  be  cited  as  an 
impartial  authority  on  such  a  subject.  Let  us  see  what 
he  says  in  his  work  on  "  The  Leaders  of  Public  Opinion 
in  Ireland,"  with  regard  to  the  movement  for  repeal  of 
the  Union,  of  which  it  seems  almost  needless  to  say  he 
disapproves.  "  O'Connell  perceived  clearly,"  says  Mr. 
Lecky,  "  that  the  tendency  of  affairs  in  Europe  was  toward 
the  recognition  of  the  principle  that  a  nation's  will  is  the 
one  legitimate  rule  of  its  government.  All  rational  men 
acknowledged  that  the  Union  was  imposed  on  Ireland  by 
corrupt  means,  contrary  to  the  wish  of  one  generation. 
O'Connell  was  prepared  to  show,  by  the  protest  of  the 
vast  majority  of  the  people,  that  it  was  retained  without 
the  acquiescence  of  the  next.  He  had  allied  himself  with 
the  parties  that  were  rising  surely  and  rapidly  to  power 
in  England — with  the  democracy,  whose  gradual  progress 
is  effacing  the  most  venerable  landmarks  of  the  Constitu- 
tion— with  the  Free-traders,  whose  approaching  triumph 


238  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

he  had  hailed  and  exulted  in  from  afar.  He  had  perceived 
the  possibility  of  forming  a  powerful  party  hi  Parliament, 
which  would  be  free  to  co-operate  with  all  English  parties 
without  coalescing  with  any,  and  might  thus  turn  the 
balance  of  factions  and  decide  the  fate  of  ministries.  He 
saw,  too,  that  while  England  in  a  time  of  peace  might 
resist  the  expressed  will  of  the  Irish  nation,  its  policy 
would  be  necessarily  modified  in  time  of  war ;  and  he  pre- 
dicted that  should  there  be  a  collision  with  France  while 
the  nation  was  organized  as  in  1843,  Repeal  would  be  the 
immediate  and  the  inevitable  consequence.  In  a  word,  he 
believed  that  under  a  constitutional  government  the  will 
of  four-fifths  of  a  nation,  if  peacefully,  perseveringly,  and 
energetically  expressed,  must  sooner  or  later  be  triumph- 
ant. If  a  war  had  broken  out  during  the  agitation — if 
the  life  of  O'Connell  had  been  prolonged  ten  years  longer 
— if  any  worthy  successor  had  assumed  his  mantle — if  a 
fearful  famine  had  not  broken  the  spirit  of  the  people — 
who  can  say  that  the  agitation  would  not  have  been  suc- 
cessful ?  "  No  one,  we  fancy,  except  those  who  are  always 
convinced  that  nothing  can  ever  come  to  pass  which  they 
think  ought  not  to  come  to  pass.  At  all  events,  if  an 
English  political  philosopher,  surveying  the  events  after 
a  distance  of  thirty  years,  is  of  opinion  that  Repeal  was 
possible,  it  is  not  surprising  that  O'Connell  thought  its 
attainment  possible  at  the  time  when  he  set  himself  to 
agitate  for  it.  Even  if  this  be  not  conceded,  it  will  at 
least  be  allowed  that  it  is  not  very  surprising  if  the  Irish 
peasant  saw  no  absurdity  in  the  movement.  Our  system 
of  government  by  party  does  not  lay  claim  to  absolute  per- 
fection. It  is  an  excellent  mechanism,  on  the  whole ;  it  is 
probably  the  most  satisfactory  that  the  wit  of  man  has 
yet  devised  for  the  management  of  the  affairs  of  a  state ; 
but  its  greatest  admirers  will  bear  to  be  told  that  it  has  its 
drawbacks  and  disadvantages.  One  of  these  undoubtedly 


THE  REPEAL  TEAR.  239 

is  found  in  the  fact  that  so  few  reforms  are  accomplished 
in  deference  to  the  claims  of  justice,  in  comparison  with 
those  that  are  yielded  to  the  pressure  of  numbers.  A 
great  English  statesman  in  our  own  day  once  said  that 
Parliament  had  done  many  just  things,  but  few  things 
because  they  were  just.  O'Connell  and  the  Irish  people 
saw  that  Catholic  emancipation  had  been  yielded  to  pres- 
sure rather  than  to  justice ;  it  is  not  wonderful  if  they 
thought  that  pressure  might  prevail  as  well  in  the  matter 
of  Repeal. 

In  many  respects  O'Connell  differed  from  more  modern 
Irish  Nationalists.  He  was  a  thorough  Liberal.  He  was 
a  devoted  opponent  of  negro  slavery ;  he  was  a  stanch 
Free-trader ;  he  was  a  friend  of  popular  education ;  he  was 
an  enemy  to  all  excess ;  he  was  opposed  to  strikes ;  he 
•was  an  advocate  of  religious  equality  everywhere ;  and  he 
declined  to  receive  the  commands  of  the  Vatican  in  his  po- 
litical agitation.  "  I  am  a  Catholic,  but  I  am  not  a  Papist," 
was  his  own  definition  of  his  religious  attitude.  He 
preached  the  doctrine  of  constitutional  agitation  strictly, 
and  declared  that  no  political  Reform  was  worth  the  shed- 
ding of  one  drop  of  blood.  It  may  be  asked  how  it  came 
about  that  with  all  these  excellent  attributes,  which  all 
critics  now  allow  to  him,  O'Connell  was  so  detested  by  the 
vast  majority  of  the  English  people.  One  reason,  undoubt- 
edly, is,  that  O'Connell  deliberately  revived  and  worked 
up  for  his  political  purposes  the  almost  extinct  national 
hatreds  of  Celt  and  Saxon.  As  a  phrase  of  political 
controversy,  he  may  be  said  to  have  invented  the  word 
"  Saxon."  He  gave  a  terrible  license  to  his  tongue.  His 
abuse  was  outrageous ;  his  praise  was  outrageous.  The 
very  effusiveness  of  his  loyalty  told  to  his  disadvantage. 
People  could  not  understand  how  one  who  perpetually 
denounced  "  the  Saxon  "  could  be  so  enthusiastic  and  rapt- 
urous  in  his  professions  of  loyalty  to  the  Saxon's  Queen. 


240  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

In  the  common  opinion  of  Englishmen,  all  the  evils  of 
Ireland,  all  the  troubles  attaching  to  the  connection 
between  the  two  countries,  had  arisen  from  this  unmiti- 
gated, rankling  hatred  of  Celt  for  Saxon.  It  was  im- 
possible for  them  to  believe  that  a  man  who  deliberately 
applied  all  the  force  of  his  eloquence  to  revive  it  could  be 
a  genuine  patriot.  It  appeared  intolerable  that  while  thus 
laboring  to  make  the  Celt  hate  the  Saxon  he  should  yet 
profess  an  extravagant  devotion  to  the  Sovereign  of  Eng- 
land. Yet  O'Connell  was  probably  quite  sincere  in  his 
professions  of  loyalty.  He  was  in  no  sense  a  revolutionist. 
He  had  from  his  education  in  a  French  college  acquired 
an  early  detestation  of  the  principles  of  the  French  Revolu- 
tion. Of  the  Irish  rebels  of  '98  he  spoke  with  as  savage 
an  intolerance  as  the  narrowest  English  Tories  could 
show  in  speaking  of  himself.  The  Tones,  and  Emmetts, 
and  Fitzgeralds,  whom  so  many  of  the  Irish  people  adored, 
were,  in  O'Connell's  eyes,  and  in  his  words,  only  "  a  gang 
of  miscreants."  He  grew  angry  at  the  slightest  expres- 
sion of  an  opinion  among  his  followers  that  seemed  to 
denote  even  a  willingness  to  discuss  any  of  the  doctrines 
of  Communism.  His  theory  and  his  policy  evidently  were 
that  Ireland  was  to  be  saved  by  a  dictatorship  intrusted 
to  himself,  with  the  Irish  priesthood  acting  as  his  officers 
and  agents.  He  maintained  the  authority  of  the  priests, 
and  his  own  authority  by  means  of  them  and  over  them. 
The  political  system  of  the  country  for  the  purposes  of 
agitation  was  to  be  a  sort  of  hierarchy ;  the  parish  priests 
occupying  the  lowest  grade,  the  bishops  standing  on  the 
higher  steps,  and  O'Connell  himself  supreme,  as  the 
pontiff,  over  all. 

He  had  a  Parliamentary  system  by  means  of  which  he 
proposed  to  approach  more  directly  the  question  of  Repeal 
of  the  Union.  He  got  seats  in  the  House  of  Commons  for 
a  number  of  his  sons,  his  nephews,  and  his  sworn  retain- 


THE  REPEAL  TEAR.  241 

ers.  "O'Connell's  tail"  was  the  precursor  of  "the  Pope's 
Brass  Band"  in  the  slang  of  the  House  of  Commons.  He 
had  an  almost  supreme  control  over  the  Irish  constitu- 
encies, and  whenever  a  vacancy  took  place  he  sent  down 
the  Repeal  candidate  to  contest  it.  He  always  inculcated 
and  insisted  on  the  necessity  of  order  and  peace.  Indeed, 
as  he  proposed  to  carry  on  his  agitation  altogether  by  the 
help  of  the  bishops  and  the  priests,  it  was  not  possible 
for  him,  even  were  he  so  inclined,  to  conduct  it  on  any 
other  than  peaceful  principles.  "  The  man  who  commits 
a  crime  gives  strength  to  the  enemy,"  was  a  maxim  which 
he  was  never  weary  of  impressing  upon  his  followers. 
The  Temperance  movement  set  on  foot  with  such  remark- 
able and  sudden  success  by  Father  Mathew  was  at  once 
turned  to  account  by  O'Connell.  He  was  himself,  in  his 
later  years  at  all  events,  a  very  temperate  man,  and  he  was 
delighted  at  the  prospect  of  good  order  and  discipline  which 
the  Temperance  movement  afforded.  Father  Mathew  was 
very  far  from  sharing  all  the  political  opinions  of  O'Con- 
nell. The  sweet  and  simple  friar,  whose  power  was  that 
of  goodness  and  enthusiasm  only,  and  who  had  but  little 
force  of  character  or  intellect,  shrank  from  political  agita- 
tion, and  was  rather  Conservative  than  otherwise  in  his 
views.  But  he  could  not  afford  to  repudiate  the  support 
of  O'Connell,  who  on  all  occasions  glorified  the  Temperance 
movement,  and  called  upon  his  followers  to  join  it,  and 
was  always  boasting  of  his  "  noble  army  of  Teetotallers." 
It  was  probably  when  he  found  that  the  mere  fact  of  his 
having  supported  the  Melbourne  Government  did  so  much 
to  discredit  that  Government  in  the  eyes  of  Englishmen, 
and  to  bring  about  its  fall,  that  O'Connell  went  deliberately 
out  of  the  path  of  mere  Parliamentary  agitation,  and 
started  that  system  of  agitation  by  monster  meeting  which 
has  since  his  time  been  regularly  established  among  us  as 
a  principal  part  of  all  political  organization  for  a  definite 

16 


242  A  HISTOEY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

purpose.  He  founded  in  Dublin  a  Repeal  Association 
which  met  in  a  place  on  Burgh  Quay,  and  which  he  styled 
Conciliation  Hall.  Around  him  in  this  Association  he 
gathered  his  sons,  his  relatives,  his  devoted  followers, 
priestly  and  lay.  The  Nation  newspaper,  then  hi  its 
youth  and  full  of  a  fresh  literary  vigor,  was  one  of  his 
most  brilliant  instruments.  At  a  later  period  of  the 
agitation  it  was  destined  to  be  used  against  him,  and  with 
severe  effect.  The  famous  monster  meetings  were  usually 
held  on  a  Sunday,  on  some  open  spot,  mostly  selected  for 
its  historic  fame,  and  with  all  the  picturesque  surround- 
ings of  hill  and  stream.  From  the  dawn  of  the  summer 
day  the  Repealers  were  thronging  to  the  scene  of  the 
meeting.  They  came  from  all  parts  of  the  neighboring 
country  for  miles  and  miles.  They  were  commonly  mar- 
shalled and  guided  by  their  parish  priests.  They  all 
attended  the  services  of  their  Church  before  the  meeting 
began.  The  influence  of  his  religion  and  of  his  patriotic 
feelings  was  brought  to  bear  at  once  upon  the  impression- 
able and  emotional  Irish  Celt.  At  the  meeting  O'Connell 
and  several  of  his  chosen  orators  addressed  the  crowd  on 
the  subject  of  the  wrongs  done  to  Ireland  by  "  the  Saxon," 
the  claims  of  Ireland  to  the  restoration  of  her  old  Parlia- 
ment in  College  Green,  and  the  certainty  of  her  having  it 
restored  if  Irishmen  only  obeyed  O'Connell  and  their 
priests,  were  sober,  and  displayed  their  strength  and  their 
unity. 

O'Connell  himself,  it  is  needless  to  say,  was  always  the 
great  orator  of  the  day.  The  agitation  developed  a  great 
deal  of  literary  talent  among  the  younger  men  of  educa- 
tion ;  but  it  never  brought  out  a  man  who  was  even  spoken 
of  as  a  possible  successor  to  O'Connell  in  eloquence.  His 
magnificent  voice  enabled  him  to  do  what  no  genius  and 
no  eloquence  less  aptly  endowed  could  have  done.  He 
could  send  his  lightest  word  thrilling  to  the  extreme  of 


THE  REPEAL  TEAR.  243 

the  vast  concourse  of  people  whom  he  desired  to  move. 
He  swayed  them  with  the  magic  of  an  absolute  control. 
He  understood  all  the  moods  of  his  people ;  to  address  him- 
self to  them  came  naturally  to  him.  He  made  them  roar 
with  laughter ;  he  made  them  weep ;  he  made  them  thrill 
with  indignation.  As  the  shadow  runs  over  a  field,  so 
the  impression  of  his  varying  eloquence  ran  over  the  as- 
semblage. He  commanded  the  emotions  of  his  hearers  as 
a  consummate  conductor  sways  the  energies  of  his  or- 
chestra. Every  allusion  told.  When,  in  one  of  the  meet- 
ings held  in  his  native  Kerry,  he  turned  solemnly  round  and 
appealed  to  "  yonder  blue  mountains  where  you  and  I  were 
cradled ; "  or  in  sight  of  the  objects  he  described  he  apos- 
trophized Ireland  as  the  "  land  of  the  green  valley  and  the 
rushing  river  " — an  admirably  characteristic  and  complete 
description ;  or  recalled  some  historical  association  con- 
nected with  the  scene  he  surveyed — each  was  some  special 
appeal  to  the  instant  feelings  of  his  peculiar  audience. 
Sometimes  he  indulged  hi  the  grossest  and  what  ought 
to  have  been  the  most  ridiculous  flattery  of  his  hearers — 
flattery  which  would  have  offended  and  disgusted  the 
dullest  English  audience.  But  the  Irish  peasant,  with  all 
his  keen  sense  of  the  ridiculous  in  others,  is  singularly 
open  to  the  influence  of  any  appeal  to  his  own  vanity. 
There  is  a  great  deal  of  the  "  eternal- womanly  "  in  the 
Celtic  nature,  and  it  is  not  easy  to  overflatter  one  of  the 
race.  Doubtless  O'Connell  knew  this  and  acted  purposely 
on  it ;  and  this  was  a  peculiarity  of  his  political  conduct 
which  it  would  be  hard  indeed  to  commend  or  even  to 
defend.  But,  in  truth,  he  adopted  in  his  agitation  the 
tactics  he  had  employed  at  the  bar.  "  A  good  speech  is  a 
good  thing,"  he  used  to  say  ;  "  but  the  verdict  is  the  thing." 
His  flattery  of  his  hearers  was  not  grosser  than  his  abuse 
of  all  those  whom  they  did  not  like.  His  dispraise  often 
had  absolutely  no  meaning  in  it.  There  was  no  sense 


244  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

whatever  in  calling  the  Duke  of  Wellington  "  a  stunted 
corporal ; "  one  might  as  well  have  called  Mont  Blanc  a 
mole-hill.  Nobody  could  have  shown  more  clearly  than 
O'Connell  did  that  he  did  not  believe  the  Times  to  be  "  an 
obscure  rag."  It  would  have  been  as  humorous  and  as 
truthful  to  say  that  there  was  no  such  paper  as  the  Times. 
But  these  absurdities  made  an  ignorant  audience  laugh 
for  the  moment,  and  O'Connell  had  gained  the  only  point 
he  just  then  wanted  to  carry.  He  would  probably  have 
answered  any  one  who  remonstrated  with  him  on  the  dis- 
ingenuousness  of  such  sayings,  as  Mrs.  Thrale  says  Burke 
once  answered  her  when  she  taxed  him  with  a  want  of 
literal  accuracy,  by  quoting,  "  Odds  life,  must  one  swear 
to  the  truth  of  a  song  ?  "  But  this  recklessness  of  epithet 
and  description  did  much  to  make  O'Connell  distrusted 
and  disliked  hi  England,  where,  hi  whatever  heat  of 
political  controversy,  words  are  supposed  to  be  the  expres- 
sions of  some  manner  of  genuine  sentiment.  Of  course 
many  of  O' Council's  abusive  epithets  were  not  only  full 
of  humor,  but  did,  to  some  extent,  fairly  represent  the 
weakness  at  least  of  those  against  whom  they  were 
directed.  Some  of  his  historical  allusions  were  of  a  more 
mischievous  nature  than  any  mere  personalities  could 
have  been.  "  Peel  and  Wellington,"  he  said  at  Kilkenny, 
"  may  be  second  Cromwells ;  they  may  get  Cromwell's 
blunted  truncheon,  and  they  may — oh,  sacred  heavens  ! — 
enact  on  the  fair  occupants  of  that  gallery  "  (pointing  to 
the  ladies'  gallery),  "  the  murder  of  the  Wexford  women. 
Let  it  not  be  supposed  that  when  I  made  that  appeal  to 
the  ladies  it  was  but  a  flight  of  my  imagination.  No ! 
when  Cromwell  entered  the  town  of  Wexford  by  treachery, 
three  hundred  ladies,  the  beauty  and  loveliness  of  Wex- 
ford, the  young  and  the  old,  the  maid  and  the  matron, 
were  collected  round  the  Cross  of  Christ ;  they  prayed  to 
Heaven  for  mercy,  and  I  hope  they  found  it ;  they  prayed 


THE  EEPEAL  YEAR,  245 

to  the  English  for  humanity,  and  Cromwell  slaughtered 
them.  I  tell  you  this  :  three  hundred  women,  the  grace 
and  beauty  and  virtue  of  Wexford,  were  slaughtered  by 
the  English  ruffians — sacred  heaven !  "  He  went  on  then 
to  assure  his  hearers  that  "  the  ruffianly  Saxon  paper, 
the  Times,  in  the  number  received  by  me  to-day,  presumes 
to  threaten  us  again  with  such  a  scene."  One  would  like 
to  see  the  copy  of  the  Times  which  contained  such  a 
threat,  or,  indeed,  any  words  that  could  be  tortured  into 
a  semblance  of  any  such  hideous  meaning.  But  the  great 
agitator,  when  he  found  that  he  had  excited  enough  the 
horror  of  his  audience,  proceeded  to  reassure  them  by  the 
means  of  all  others  most  objectionable  and  dangerous  at 
such  a  time.  "  I  am  not  imaginative,"  he  said,  "  when  I 
talk  of  the  possibility  of  such  scenes  anew ;  but  yet  I  as- 
sert that  there  is  no  danger  to  our  women  now,  for  the  men 
of  Ireland  would  die  to  the  last  in  their  defence."  Here 
the  whole  meeting  broke  into  a  storm  of  impasssioned 
cheering.  "  Ay,"  the  orator  exclaimed,  when  the  storm 
found  a  momentary  hush,  "  we  were  a  paltry  remnant 
then ;  we  are  millions  now."  At  Mullaghmast,  O'Connell 
made  an  impassioned  allusion  to  the  massacre  of  Irish 
chieftains,  said  to  have  taken  place  on  that  very  spot  in 
the  reign  of  Queen  Elizabeth.  "Three  hundred  and 
ninety  Irish  chiefs  perished  here !  They  came,  confiding 
in  Saxon  honor,  relying  on  the  protection  of  the  Queen, 
to  a  friendly  conference.  In  the  midst  of  revelry,  in  the 
cheerful  light  of  the  banquet  house,  they  were  surrounded 
and  butchered.  None  returned  save  one.  Their  wives 
were  widows,  their  children  fatherless.  In  their  home- 
steads was  heard  the  shrill  shriek  of  despair — the  cry  of 
bitter  agony.  Oh,  Saxon  cruelty,  how  it  cheers  my  heart 
to  think  that  you  dare  not  attempt  such  a  deed  again !  " 
It  is  not  necessary  to  point  out  what  the  effect  of  such 
descriptions  and  such  allusions  must  have  been  upon  an 


246  A  UISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

excitable  and  an  ignorant  peasant  audience — on  men  who 
were  ready  to  believe  in  all  sincerity  that  England  only 
wanted  the  opportunity  to  re-enact,  in  the  reign  of  Queen 
Victoria,  the  scenes  of  Elizabeth's  or  Cromwell's  day. 

The  late  Lord  Lytton  has  given,  in  his  poem  "  St.  Ste- 
phens," a  picturesque  description  of  one  of  these  meetings, 
and  of  the  effect  produced  upon  himself  by  O'Connell's 
eloquence.  "  Once  to  my  sight,"  he  says,  "  the  giant  thus 
was  given ;  walled  by  wide  air  and  roofed  by  boundless 
heaven."  He  describes  "  the  human  ocean  "  lying  spread 
out  at  the  giant's  feet ;  its  "  wave  on  wave "  flowing 
"  into  space  away."  Not  unnaturally,  Lord  Lytton 
thought,  "  no  clarion  could  have  sent  its  sound  even  to 
the  centre"  of  that  crowd. 

"  And  as  I  thought,  rose  the  sonorous  swell 
As  from  some  church  tower  swings  the  silvery  bell  ; 
Aloft  and  clear  from  airy  tide  to  tide, 
It  glided  easy  as  a  bird  may  glide. 
To  the  last  verge  of  that  vast  audience  sent, 
It  played  with  each  wild  passion  as  it  went ; 
Now  stirred  the  uproar — now  the  murmur  stilled, 
And  sobs  or  laughter  answered  as  it  willed. 
Then  did  I  know  what  spells  of  infinite  choice 
To  rouse  or  lull  has  the  sweet  human  voice. 
Then  did  I  learn  to  seize  the  sudden  clew 
To  the  grand  troublous  life  antique — to  view, 
Under  the  rock-stand  of  Demosthenes, 
Unstable  Athens  heave  her  noisy  seas." 

The  crowds  who  attended  the  monster  meetings  came 
in  a  sort  of  military  order  and  with  a  certain  parade  of 
military  discipline.  At  the  meeting  held  on  the  Hill  of 
Tara,  where  O'Connell  stood  beside  the  stone  said  to  have 
been  used  for  the  coronation  of  the  ancient  monarchs  of 
Ireland,  it  is  declared,  on  the  authority  of  careful  and  un- 
sympathetic witnesses,  that  a  quarter  of  a  million  of  people 
must  have  been  present.  The  Government  naturally  felt 


THE  REPEAL  YEAK,  247 

that  there  was  a  very  considerable  danger  in  the  massing 
together  of  such  vast  crowds  of  men  in  something  like 
military  array  and  under  the  absolute  leadership  of  one 
man,  who  openly  avowed  that  he  had  called  them  together 
to  show  England  what  was  the  strength  her  statesmen 
would  have  to  fear  if  they  continued  to  deny  Repeal  to 
his  demand.  It  is  certain  now  that  O'Connell  did  not  at 
any  time  mean  to  employ  force  for  the  attainment  of  his 
ends.  But  it  is  equally  certain  that  he  wished  the  Eng- 
lish Government  to  see  that  he  had  the  command  of  an 
immense  number  of  men,  and  probably  even  to  believe 
that  he  would,  if  needs  were,  hurl  them  in  rebellion  upon 
England  if  ever  she  should  be  embarrassed  with  a  foreign 
war.  It  is  certain,  too,  that  many  of  O'Connell's  most 
ardent  admirers,  especially  among  the  young  men,  were 
fully  convinced  that  some  day  or  other  their  leader  would 
call  on  them  to  fight,  and  were  much  disappointed  when 
they  found  that  he  had  no  such  intention.  The  Govern- 
ment at  last  resolved  to  interfere.  A  meeting  was  an- 
nounced to  be  held  at  Clontarf  on  Sunday,  October  8th, 
1843.  Clontarf  is  near  Dublin,  and  is  famous  in  Irish  his- 
tory as  the  scene  of  a  great  victory  of  the  Irish  over  their 
Danish  invaders.  It  was  intended  that  this  meeting 
should  surpass  in  numbers  and  in  earnestness  the  assem- 
blage at  Tara.  On  the  very  day  before  the  8th  the  Lord- 
lieutenant  issued  a  proclamation  prohibiting  the  meeting 
as  "  calculated  to  excite  reasonable  and  well-grounded 
apprehensions,"  in  that  its  object  was  "to  accomplish 
alterations  in  the  laws  and  constitutions  of  the  realm  by 
intimidation  and  the  demonstration  of  physical  force." 
O'Connell's  power  over  the  people  was  never  shown  more 
effectively  than  in  the  control  which  at  that  critical 
moment  he  was  still  able  to  exercise.  The  populations 
were  already  coming  in  to  Clontarf  in  streams  from  all 
the  country  round  when  the  proclamation  of  the  Lord- 


248  A  UISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

lieutenant  was  issued.  No  doubt  the  Irish  Government 
ran  a  terrible  risk  when  they  delayed  so  long  the  issue  of 
their  proclamation.  With  the  people  already  assembling 
in  such  masses,  the  risk  of  a  collision  with  the  police  and 
the  soldiery,  and  of  a  consequent  massacre,  is  something 
still  shocking  to  contemplate.  It  is  not  surprising,  per- 
haps, if  O'Connell  and  many  of  his  followers  made  it  a 
charge  against  the  Government  that  they  intended  to 
bring  about  such  a  collision  in  order  to  make  an  example 
of  some  of  the  Repealers,  and  thus  strike  terror  through 
the  country.  Some  sort  of  collision  would  almost  undoubt- 
edly have  occurred  but  for  the  promptitude  of  O'Connell 
himself.  He  at  once  issued  a  proclamation  of  his  own  to 
which  the  populations  were  likely  to  pay  far  more  atten- 
tion than  they  would  to  anything  coming  from  Dublin 
Castle.  O'Connell  declared  that  the  orders  of  the  Lord- 
lieutenant  must  be  obeyed ;  that  the  meeting  must  not 
take  place;  and  that  the  people  must  return  to  their 
homes.  The  "  uncrowned  king,"  as  some  of  his  admirers 
loved  to  call  him,  was  obeyed,  and  no  meeting  was  held. 
From  that  moment,  however,  the  great  power  of  the 
Repeal  agitation  was  gone.  The  Government  had  accom- 
plished far  more  by  their  proclamation  than  they  could 
possibly  have  imagined  at  the  time.  They  had,  without 
knowing  it,  compelled  O'Connell  to  show  his  hand.  It 
was  now  made  clear  that  he  did  not  intend  to  have  resort 
to  force.  From  that  hour  there  was  virtually  a  schism  be- 
tween the  elder  Repealers  and  the  younger.  The  young 
and  fiery  followers  of  the  great  agitator  lost  all  faith  in 
him.  It  would  in  any  case  have  been  impossible  to  main- 
tain for  any  very  long  time  the  state  of  national  tension 
in  which  Ireland  had  been  kept.  It  must  soon  come 
either  to  a  climax  or  to  an  anti-climax.  It  came  to  an  anti- 
climax. All  the  imposing  demonstrations  of  physical 
strength  lost  their  value  when  it  was  made  positively 


THE  REPEAL  YEAR.  249 

known  that  they  were  only  demonstrations,  and  that 
nothing  was  ever  to  come  of  them.  The  eye  of  an  atten- 
tive foreigner  was  then  fixed  on  Ireland  and  on  O'Con- 
nell ;  the  eye  of  one  destined  to  play  a  part  in  the  politi- 
cal history  of  our  time  which  none  other  has  surpassed. 
Count  Cavour  had  not  long  returned  to  his  own  country 
from  a  visit  made  with  the  express  purpose  of  studying 
the  politics  and  the  general  condition  of  England  and  Ire- 
land. He  wrote  to  a  friend  about  the  crisis  then  passing 
in  Ireland.  "  When  one  is  at  a  distance,"  he  said,  "  from 
the  theatre  of  events,  it  is  easy  to  make  prophecies  which 
have  already  been  contradicted  by  facts.  But  according 
to  my  view  O'Connell's  fate  is  sealed.  On  the  first  vigor- 
ous demonstration  of  his  opponents  he  has  drawn  back ; 
from  that  moment  he  has  ceased  to  be  dangerous." 
Cavour  was  perfectly  right.  It  was  never  again  possible 
to  bring  the  Irish  people  up  to  the  pitch  of  enthusiasm 
which  O'Connell  had  wrought  them  to  before  the  sup- 
pression of  the  Clontarf  meeting;  and  before  long  the 
Irish  national  movement  had  split  in  two. 

The  Government  at  once  proceeded  to  the  prosecution 
of  O'Connell  and  some  of  his  principal  associates.  Daniel 
O'Connell  himself,  his  son  John,  the  late  Sir  John  Gray, 
and  Sir  Charles  Gavan  Duffy,  were  the  most  conspicuous 
of  those  against  whom  the  prosecution  was  directed. 
They  were  charged  with  conspiring  to  raise  and  excite 
disaffection  among  her  Majesty's  subjects,  to  excite  them 
to  hatred  and  contempt  of  the  Government  and  Constitu- 
tion of  the  realm.  The  trial  was,  in  many  ways,  a  sin- 
gularly unfortunate  proceeding.  The  Government  prose- 
cutor objected  to  all  the  Catholics  whose  names  were 
called  as  jurors.  An  error  of  the  sheriffs  in  the  construc- 
tion of  the  jury-lists  had  already  reduced  by  a  consider- 
able number  the  roll  of  Catholics  entitled  to  serve  on 
juries.  It  therefore  happened  that  the  greatest  of  Irish 


250  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

Catholics,  the  representative  Catholic  of  his  day,  the 
principal  agent  in  the  work  of  carrying  Catholic  Emanci- 
pation, was  tried  by  a  jury  composed  exclusively  of  Prot- 
estants. It  has  only  to  be  added  that  this  was  done 
in  the  metropolis  of  a  country  essentially  Catholic;  a 
country  five-sixths  of  whose  people  were  Catholics ;  and 
on  a  question  affecting  indirectly,  if  not  directly,  the 
whole  position  and  claims  of  Catholics.  The  trial  was 
long.  O'Connell  defended  himself;  and  his  speech  was 
universally  regarded  as  wanting  the  power  that  had  made 
his  defence  of  others  so  effective  in  former  days.  It  was 
for  the  most  part  a  sober  and  somewhat  heavy  argument 
to  prove  that  Ireland  had  lost  instead  of  gained  by  her 
union  with  England.  The  jury  found  O'Connell  guilty, 
along  with  most  of  his  associates,  and  he  was  sentenced 
to  twelve  months'  imprisonment  and  a  fine  of  £2000. 
The  others  received  lighter  sentences.  O'Connell  appealed 
to  the  House  of  Lords  against  the  sentence.  In  the  mean- 
time he  issued  a  proclamation  to  the  Irish  people  com- 
manding them  to  keep  perfectly  quiet  and  not  to  commit 
any  offence  against  the  law.  "  Every  man,"  said  one  of 
his  proclamations,  "  who  is  guilty  of  the  slightest  breach 
of  the  peace  is  an  enemy  of  me  and  of  Ireland."  The 
Irish  people  took  him  at  his  word,  and  remained  perfectly 
quiet. 

O'Connell  and  his  principal  associates  were  committed 
to  Richmond  Prison,  in  Dublin.  The  trial  had  been  de- 
layed in  various  ways,  and  the  sentence  was  not  pro- 
nounced until  May  24th,  1844.  The  appeal  to  the  House 
of  Lords — we  may  pass  over  intermediate  stages  of  pro- 
cedure— was  heard  in  the  following  September.  Five  law 
lords  were  present.  The  Lord  Chancellor  (Lord  Lynd- 
hurst)  and  Lord  Brougham  were  of  opinion  that  the  sen- 
tence of  the  court  below  should  be  affirmed.  Lord  Denman, 
Lord  Cottenham,  and  Lord  Campbell  were  of  the  opposite 


THE  REPEAL  TEAR.  251 

opinion.  Lord  Denman,  in  particular,  condemned  the 
manner  in  which  the  jury-lists  had  been  prepared.  Some 
of  his  words  on  the  occasion  became  memorable,  and 
passed  into  a  sort  of  proverbial  expression.  Such  prac- 
tices, he  said,  would  make  of  the  law  "  a  mockery,  a  de- 
lusion, and  a  snare."  A  strange  and  memorable  scene 
followed.  The  constitution  of  the  House  of  Lords  then, 
and  for  a  long  time  after,  made  no  difference  between  law 
lords  and  others  in  voting  on  a  question  of  appeal.  As  a 
matter  of  practice  and  of  fairness  the  lay  peers  hardly 
ever  interfered  in  the  voting  on  an  appeal.  But  they  had 
an  undoubted  right  to  do  so ;  and  it  is  even  certain  that 
in  one  or  two  peculiar  cases  they  had  exercised  the  right. 
If  the  lay  lords  were  to  vote  in  this  instance,  the  fate  of 
O'Connell  and  his  companions  could  not  be  doubtful. 
O'Connell  had  always  been  the  bitter  enemy  of  the  House 
of  Lords.  He  had  vehemently  denounced  its  authority, 
its  practices,  and  its  leading  members.  Nor,  if  the  lay 
peers  had  voted  and  confirmed  the  judgment  of  the  court 
below,  could  it  have  been  positively  said  that  an  injustice 
was  done  by  their  interference.  The  majority  of  the 
judges  on  the  writ  of  error  had  approved  the  judgment  of 
the  court  below.  In  the  House  of  Lords  itself  the  Lord 
Chancellor  and  Lord  Brougham  were  of  opinion  that  the 
judgment  ought  to  be  sustained.  There  would,  therefore, 
have  been  some  ground  for  maintaining  that  the  sub- 
stantial justice  of  the  case  had  been  met  by  the  action  of 
the  lay  peers.  On  the  other  hand,  it  would  have  afforded 
a  ground  for  a  positive  outcry  in  Ireland  if  a  question 
purely  of  law  had  been  decided  by  the  votes  of  lay  peers 
against  their  bitter  enemy.  One  peer,  Lord  "Wharncliffe, 
made  a  timely  appeal  to  the  better  judgment  and  feeling 
of  his  brethren.  He  urged  them  not  to  take  a  course 
which  might  allow  any  one  to  say  that  political  or  personal 
feeling  had  prevailed  in  a  judicial  decision  of  the  House 


252  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

of  Lords.  The  appeal  had  its  effect.  A  moment  before 
one  lay  peer  at  least  had  openly  declared  that  he  would 
insist  on  his  right  to  vote.  When  the  Lord  Chancellor 
was  about  to  put  the  question  in  the  first  Distance,  to  as- 
certain hi  the  usual  way  whether  a  division  would  be 
necessary,  several  lay  peers  seemed  as  if  they  were  de- 
termined to  vote.  But  the  appeal  of  Lord  Wharncliffe 
settled  the  matter.  All  the  lay  peers  at  once  withdrew, 
and  left  the  matter  according  to  the  usual  course  in  the 
hands  of  the  law  lords.  The  majority  of  these  being 
against  the  judgment  of  the  court  below,  it  was  accord- 
ingly reversed,  and  O'Connell  and  his  associates  were  set 
at  liberty.  The  propriety  of  a  lay  peer  voting  on  a  ques- 
tion of  judicial  appeal  was  never  raised  again  so  long  as 
the  appellate  jurisdiction  of  the  House  of  Lords  was  still 
exercised  in  the  old  and  now  obsolete  fashion. 

Nothing  could  well  have  been  more  satisfactory  and 
more  fortunate  in  its  results  than  the  conduct  of  the 
House  of  Lords.  The  effect  upon  the  mind  of  the  Irish 
people  would  have  been  deplorable  if  it  had  been  seen  that 
O'Connell  was  convicted  by  a  jury  on  which  there  were 
no  Roman  Catholics,  and  that  the  sentence  was  confirmed, 
not  by  a  judicial  but  by  a  strictly  political  vote  of  the 
House  of  Lords.  As  it  was,  the  influence  of  the  decision 
which  proved  that  even  in  the  assembly  most  bitterly  de- 
nounced by  O'Connell  he  could  receive  fair  play,  was  in 
the  highest  degree  satisfactory.  It  cannot  be  doubted 
that  it  did  something  to  weaken  the  force  of  O'Connell's 
own  denunciations  of  Saxon  treachery  and  wrong-doing. 
The  influence  of  O'Connell  was  never  the  same  after  the 
triaL  Many  causes  combined  to  bring  about  this  result. 
Most  writers  ascribe  it,  above  all,  to  the  trial  itself,  and 
the  evidence  it  afforded  that  the  English  Government  were 
strong  enough  to  prosecute  and  punish  even  O'Connell  if 
he  provoked  them  too  far.  It  is  somewhat  surprising  to 


THE  REPEAL  YEAE.  253 

find  intelligent  men  like  Mr.  Green,  the  author  of  "  A 
Short  History  of  the  English  People,"  countenancing  such 
a  belief.  If  the  House  of  Lords  had,  by  the  votes  of  the 
lay  peers,  confirmed  the  sentence  on  O'Connell,  he  would 
have  come  out  of  his  prison  at  the  expiration  of  his  period 
of  sentence  more  popular  and  more  powerful  than  ever. 
Had  his  strength  and  faculty  of  agitation  lasted,  he  might 
have  agitated  thenceforth  with  more  effect  than  ever.  If 
the  Clontarf  meeting  had  not  disclosed  to  a  large  section 
of  his  followers  that  his  policy,  after  all,  was  only  to  be 
one  of  talk,  he  might  have  come  out  of.  prison  just  the 
man  he  had  been,  the  leader  of  all  classes  of  Catholics 
and  Nationalists.  But  the  real  blow  given  to  O'Connell's 
popularity  was  given  by  O'Connell  himself.  The  moment 
it  was  made  clear  that  nothing  was  to  be  done  but  agitate, 
and  that  all  the  monster  meetings,  the  crowds  and  ban- 
ners and  bands  of  music,  the  marshalling  and  marching 
and  reviewing,  meant  nothing  more  than  Father  Mathew's 
temperance  meetings  meant — that  moment  all  the  youth 
of  the  movement  fell  off  from  O'Connell.  The  young  men 
were  very  silly,  as  after-events  proved.  O'Connell  was 
far  more  wise,  and  had  an  infinitely  better  estimate  of  the 
strength  of  England  than  they  had.  But  it  is  certain  that 
the  young  men  were  disgusted  with  the  kind  of  gigantic 
sham  which  the  great  agitator  seemed  to  have  been  con- 
ducting for  so  long  a  time.  It  would  have  been  impossible 
to  keep  up  forever  such  an  excitement  as  that  which  got 
together  the  monster  meetings.  Such  heat  cannot  be 
brought  up  to  the  burning-point  and  kept  there  at  will. 
A  reaction  was  inevitable.  O'Connell  was  getting  old, 
and  had  lived  a  life  of  work  and  wear-and-tear  enough  to 
break  down  'even  his  constitution  of  iron.  He  had  kept  a 
great  part  of  his  own  followers  in  heart,  as  he  had  kept 
the  Government  in  alarm,  by  leaving  it  doubtful  whether 
he  would  not,  in  the  end,  make  an  appeal  to  the  reserve 


254  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

of  physical  force  which  he  so  often  boasted  of  having  at 
his  back.  "When  the  whole  secret  was  out,  he  ceased  to 
be  an  object  of  fear  to  the  one,  and  of  enthusiasm  to  the 
other.  It  was  neither  the  Lord-lieutenant's  proclamation 
nor  the  prosecution  by  the  Government  that  impaired  the 
influence  of  O'Connell.  It  was  O'Connell's  own  procla- 
mation, declaring  for  submission  to  the  law,  that  de- 
throned him.  From  that  moment  the  political  monarch 
had  to  dispute  with  rebels  for  his  crown ;  and  the  crown 
fell  off  iii  the  struggle,  like  that  which  Uhland  tells  of  in 
the  pretty  poem. 

For  the  Clontarf  meeting  had  been  the  climax.  There 
was  all  manner  of  national  rejoicing  when  the  decision 
of  the  House  of  Lords  set  O'Connell  and  his  fellow-prison- 
ers free.  There  were  illuminations  and  banquets  and  meet- 
ings and  triumphal  processions,  renewed  declarations  of 
allegiance  to  the  great  leader,  and  renewed  protestations 
on  his  part  that  Repeal  was  coming.  But  his  reign  was 
over.  His  death  may  as  well  be  recorded  here  as  later. 
His  health  broke  down ;  and  the  disputes  hi  which  he  be- 
came engaged  with  the  Young  Irelanders,  dividing  his 
party  into  two  hostile  camps,  were  a  grevious  burden  to 
him.  In  Lord  Beaconsfield's  Life  of  Lord  George  Bentinck, 
a  very  touching  description  is  given  of  the  last  speech 
made  by  O'Connell  in  Parliament.  It  was  on  April  3d, 
1846 :  "  His  appearance,"  says  Mr.  Disraeli,  "  was  of  great 
debility,  and  the  tones  of  his  voice  were  very  still.  His 
words,  indeed,  only  reached  those  who  were  immediately 
around  him,  and  the  ministers  sitting  on  the  other  side 
of  the  green  table,  and  listening  with  that  interest  and 
respectful  attention  which  became  the  occasion."  O'Con- 
nell spoke  for  nearly  two  hours.  "  It  was  a  strange  and 
touching  spectacle  to  those  who  remembered  the  form  of 
colossal  energy  and  the  clear  and  thrilling  tones  that  had 
once  startled,  disturbed,  and  controlled  senates.  ...  To 


THE  REPEAL  YEAR.  255 

the  House,  generally,  it  was  a  performance  in  dumb  show : 
a  feeble  old  man  muttering  before  a  table ;  but  respect  for 
the  great  Parliamentary  personage  kept  all  as  orderly  as 
if  the  fortunes  of  a  party  hung  upon  his  rhetoric ;  and 
though  not  an  accent  reached  the  gallery,  means  were  taken 
that  next  morning  the  country  should  not  lose  the  last,  and 
not  the  least  interesting,  of  the  speeches  of  one  who  had 
so  long  occupied  and  agitated  the  mind  of  nations." 

O'Connell  became  seized  with  a  profound  melancholy. 
Only  one  desire  seemed  left  to  him,  the  desire  to  close  his 
stormy  career  in  Rome.  The  Eternal  City  is  the  capital, 
the  shrine,  the  Mecca  of  the  Church  to  which  O'Connell 
was  undoubtedly  devoted  with  all  his  heart.  He  longed 
to  lie  down  in  the  shadow  of  the  dome  of  St.  Peter's 
and  rest  there,  and  there  die.  His  youth  had  been  wild 
in  more  ways  than  one,  and  he  had  long  been  under  the 
influence  of  a  profound  penitence.  He  had  killed  a  man 
in  a  duel,  and  was  through  all  his  after-life  haunted  by  re- 
gret for  the  deed,  although  it  was  really  forced  on  him, 
and  he  had  acted  only  as  any  other  man  of  his  time  would 
have  acted  in  such  conditions.  But  now,  in  his  old  and 
sinking  days,  all  the  errors  of  his  youth  and  his  strong 
manhood  came  back  upon  him,  and  he  longed  to  steep  the 
painful  memories  in  the  sacred  influences  of  Rome.  He 
hurried  to  Italy  at  a  time  when  the  prospect  of  the  fam- 
ine darkening  down  upon  his  country  cast  an  additional 
shadow  across  his  outward  path.  He  reached  Genoa,  and 
he  went  no  farther.  His  strength  wholly  failed  him  there, 
and  he  died,  still  far  from  Rome,  on  May  15th,  1847.  The 
close  of  his  career  was  a  mournful  collapse ;  it  was  like  the 
sudden  crumbling  in  of  some  stately  and  commanding 
tower.  The  other  day,  it  seemed,  he  filled  a  space  of  almost 
unequalled  breadth  and  height  in  the  political  landscape ; 
and  now  he  is  already  gone.  "  Even  with  a  thought  the 
rackdislimbs,  and  makes  it  indistinct,  as  water  is  hi  water." 


256  A  HISTORY  OF  OLR  OWN  TIMES. 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

PEEL'S  ADMINISTRATION. 

SOME  important  steps  in  the  progress  of  what  may  be 
described  as  social  legislation  are  part  of  the  history  of 
Peel's  Government.  The  Act  of  Parliament  which  pro- 
hibited absolutely  the  employment  of  women  and  girls  in 
mines  and  collieries  was  rendered  unavoidable  by  the  fear- 
ful exposures  made  through  the  instrumentality  of  a 
commission  appointed  to  inquire  into  the  whole  subject. 
This  commission  was  appointed  on  the  motion  of  the  then 
Lord  Ashley,  since  better  known  as  the  Earl  of  Shafts- 
bury,  a  man  who  during  the  whole  of  a  long  career  has 
always  devoted  himself — sometimes  wisely  and  success- 
fully, sometimes  indiscreetly  and  to  little  purpose,  always 
with  disinterested  and  benevolent  intention — to  the  task 
of  brightening  the  lives  and  lightening  the  burdens  of  the 
working-classes  and  the  poor.  The  commission  found 
many  hideous  evils  arising  from  the  employment  of  women 
and  girls  underground,  and  Lord  Ashley  made  such 
effective  use  of  their  disclosures  that  he  encountered  very 
little  opposition  when  he  came  to  propose  restrictive  legis- 
lation. In  some  of  the  coal-mines  women  were  literally 
employed  as  beasts  of  burden.  "Where  the  seam  of  coal 
was  too  narrow  to  allow  them  to  stand  upright,  they  had 
to  crawl  back  and  forward  on  all-fours  for  fourteen  or 
sixteen  hours  a  day,  dragging  the  trucks  laden  with  coals. 
The  trucks  were  generally  fastened  to  a  chain  which  passed 


PEEVS  ADMINISTRATION.  257 

between  the  legs  of  the  unfortunate  women,  and  was  then 
connected  with  a  belt  which  was  strapped  around  their 
naked  waists.  Their  only  clothing  often  consisted  of  an 
old  pair  of  trousers  made  of  sacking ;  and  they  were  un- 
covered from  the  waist  up — uncovered,  that  is  to  say,  ex- 
cept for  the  grime  and  filth  that  collected  and  clotted 
around  them.  All  manner  of  hideous  diseases  were  gen- 
erated in  these  unsexed  bodies.  Unsexed  almost  literally 
some  of  them  became ;  for  their  chests  were  often  hard 
and  flat  as  those  of  men ;  and  not  a  few  of  them  lost  all 
reproductive  power — a  happy  condition,  truly,  under  the 
circumstances,  where  women  who  bore  children  only  went 
up  to  the  higher  air  for  a  week  during  their  confinement, 
and  were  then  back  at  their  work  again.  It  would  be 
superfluous  to  say  that  the  immorality  engendered  by  such 
a  state  of  things  was  in  exact  keeping  with  the  other  evils 
which  it  brought  about.  Lord  Ashley  had  the  happiness 
and  the  honor  of  putting  a  stop  to  this  infamous  sort  of 
labor  forever  by  the  Act  of  1842,  which  declared  that,  after 
a  certain  limited  period,  no  woman  or  girl  whatever  should 
be  employed  in  mines  and  collieries. 

Lord  Ashley  was  less  completely  successful  in  his  en- 
deavor to  secure  a  ten  hours'  limitation  for  the  daily  labor 
of  women  and  young  persons  in  factories.  By  a  vigorous 
annual  agitation  on  the  general  subject  of  factory  labor, 
in  which  Lord  Ashley  had  followed  in  the  footsteps  of  Mr. 
Michael  Thomas  Sadler,  he  brought  the  Government  up 
to  the  point  of  undertaking  legislation  on  the  subject. 
They  first  introduced  a  bill  which  combined  a  limitation 
of  the  labor  of  children  in  factories  with  a  plan  for  com- 
pulsory education  among  the  children.  The  educational 
clauses  of  the  bill  had  to  be  abandoned  in  consequence  of 
a  somewhat  narrow-minded  opposition  among  the  Dissen- 
ters, who  feared  that  too  much  advantage  was  given  to  the 
Church.  Afterward  the  Government  brought  in  another 

17 


258  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

bill,  which  became,  in  the  end,  the  Factories  Act  of  1844. 
It  was  during  the  passing  of  this  measure  that  Lord 
Ashley  tried  unsuccessfully  to  introduce  his  ten  hours' 
limit.  The  bill  diminished  the  working  hours  of  children 
under  thirteen  years  of  age,  and  fixed  them  at  six  and  a 
half  hours  each  day ;  extended  somewhat  the  time  during 
which  they  were  to  be  under  daily  instruction,  and  did 
a  good  many  other  useful  and  wholesome  things.  The 
principle  of  legislative  interference  to  protect  youthful 
workers  in  factories  had  been  already  established  by  the 
Act  of  1833,  and  Lord  Ashley's  agitation  only  obtained  for 
it  a  somewhat  extended  application.  It  has  since  that 
time  again  and  again  received  further  extension ;  and  in 
this  time,  as  in  the  former,  there  is  a  constant  controversy 
going  on  as  to  whether  its  principles  ought  not  to  be  so 
extended  as  to  guard  in  almost  every  way  the  labor  of 
adult  women,  and  even  of  adult  men.  The  controversy 
during  Lord  Ashley's  agitation  was  always  warm  and 
often  impassioned.  Many  thoroughly  benevolent  men 
and  women  could  not  bring  themselves  to  believe  that  any 
satisfactory  and  permanent  results  could  come  of  a  legisla- 
tive interference  with  what  might  be  called  the  freedom 
of  contract  between  employers  and  employed.  They 
argued  that  it  was  idle  to  say  the  interference  was  only 
made  or  sought  in  the  case  of  women  and  boys ;  for  if  the 
women  and  boys  stop  off  working,  they  pointed  out,  the 
men  must  perforce  in  most  cases  stop  off  working  too. 
Some  of  the  public  men  afterward  most  justly  popular 
among  the  English  artisan  classes  were  opposed  to  the 
measure  on  the  ground  that  it  was  a  heedless  attempt  to 
interfere  with  fixed  economic  laws.  It  was  urged,  too, 
and  with  much  semblance  of  justice,  that  the  interference 
of  the  state  for  the  protection  or  the  compulsory  educa- 
tion of  children  in  factories  would  have  been  much  better 
employed,  and  was  far  more  loudly  called  for,  in  the  case 


PEEL'S  ADMINISTRATION.  259 

of  the  children  employed  in  agricultural  labor.  The  lot 
of  a  factory  child,  it  was  contended,  is  infinitely  better  in 
most  respects  than  that  of  the  poor  little  creature  who  is 
employed  in  hallooing  at  the  crows  on  a  farm.  The  mill- 
hand  is  well  cared  for,  well  paid,  well  able  to  care  for  him- 
self and  his  wife  and  his  family,  it  was  argued ;  but  what 
of  the  miserable  Giles  Scroggins  of  Dorsetshire  or  Somer- 
setshire, who  never  has  more  in  all  his  life  than  just 
enough  to  keep  body  and  soul  together ;  and  for  whom  at 
the  close,  the  work-house  is  the  only  haven  of  rest  ?  Why 
not  legislate  for  him — at  least  for  his  wife  and  children  ? 
Neither  point  requires  much  consideration  from  us 
at  present.  We  have  to  recognize  historical  facts  ;  and 
it  is  certain  that  this  country  has  made  up  its  mind  that 
for  the  present  and  for  a  long  time  to  come,  Parlia- 
ment will  interfere  in  whatever  way  seems  good  to 
it  with  the  conditions  on  which  labor  is  carried  on. 
There  has  been,  indeed,  a  very  marked  advance  or 
retrogression,  whichever  men  may  please  to  call  it,  in 
public  opinion  since  the  ten  hours'  agitation.  At  that 
time  compulsory  education  and  the  principles  of  Mr.  Glad- 
stone's Irish  Land  Act  would  have  seemed  alike  impossible 
to  most  persons  in  this  country.  The  practical  mind  of 
the  Englishman  carries  to  an  extreme  the  dislike  and 
contempt  for  what  the  French  call  les  principes  in  politics. 
Therefore  we  oscillate  a  good  deal,  the  pendulum  swinging 
now  very  far  in  the  direction  of  non-interference  with 
individual  action,  and  now  still  farther  in  the  direction 
of  universal  interference  and  regulation — what  was  once 
humorously  described  as  grandmotherly  legislation. 
With  our  recent  experiences  we  can  only  be  surprised 
that  a  few  years  ago  there  was  such  a  repugnance  to  the 
modest  amount  of  interference  with  individual  rights 
which  Lord  Ashley's  extremest  proposals  would  have 
sought  to  introduce.  As  regards  the  other  point,  it  is  cer- 


260  A  III STORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

tain  that  Parliament  will  atone  time  or  another  do  for  the 
children  in  the  fields  something  very  like  that  which  it 
has  done  for  the  children  in  the  factories.  It  is  enough 
for  us  to  know  that  practically  the  factory  legislation  has 
worked  very  well ;  and  that  the  non-interference  in  the 
fields  is  a  far  heavier  responsibility  on  the  conscience  of 
Parliament  than  interference  in  the  factories. 

Many  other  things  done  by  Sir  Robert  Peel's  Govern- 
ment aroused  bitter  controversy  and  agitation.  In  one  or 
two  remarkable  instances  the  ministerial  policy  went  near 
to  producing  that  discord  in  the  Conservative  party  which 
we  shall  presently  see  break  out  into  passion  and  schism 
when  Peel  came  to  deal  with  the  Corn-laws.  There  was, 
for  example,  the  grant  to  the  Roman  Catholic  College  of 
Maynooth,  a  college  for  the  education  specially  of  young 
men  who  sought  to  enter  the  ranks  of  the  priesthood. 
The  grant  was  not  a  new  thing.  Since  before  the  Act  of 
Union  a  grant  had  been  made  for  the  college.  The  Gov- 
ernment of  Sir  Robert  Peel  only  proposed  to  make  that 
which  was  insufficient  sufficient ;  to  enable  the  college  to 
be  kept  hi  repair,  and  to  accomplish  the  purpose  for  which 
it  was  founded.  As  Macaulay  put  it,  there  was  no  more 
question  of  principle  involved  than  there  would  be  in  the 
sacrifice  of  a  pound  instead  of  a  pennyweight  on  some 
particular  altar.  Yet  the  ministerial  proposition  called  up 
a  very  tempest  of  clamorous  bigotry  all  over  the  country. 
"What  Macaulay  described  hi  fierce  scorn  as  "  the  bray  of 
Exeter  Hall "  was  heard  resounding  every  day  and  night. 
Peel  carried  his  measure,  although  nearly  half  his  own 
party  hi  the  House  of  Commons  voted  against  it  on  the 
second  reading.  The  whole  controversy  has  little  interest 
now.  Perhaps  it  will  be  found  to  live  in  the  memory  of 
many  persons,  chiefly  because  of  the  quarrel  it  caused  be- 
tween Macaulay  and  his  Edinburgh  constituents,  and  of 
the  annual  motion  for  the  withdrawal  of  the  grant  which 


PEEL'S  ADMINISTRATION.  261 

was  so  long  afterward  one  of  the  regular  bores  of  the 
House  of  Commons.  Many  of  us  can  well  remember  the 
venerable  form  of  the  late  Mr.  Spooner  as  year  after  year 
he  addressed  an  apathetic,  scanty,  and  half-amused  audi- 
ence, pottering  over  his  papers  by  the  light  of  two  can- 
dles specially  placed  for  his  convenience  on  the  table 
in  front  of  the  Speaker,  and  endeavoring  in  vain  to  arouse 
England  to  serious  attention  on  the  subject  of  the  awful 
fate  she  was  preparing  for  herself  by  her  toleration  of 
the  principles  of  Rome.  The  Maynooth  grant  was 
abolished,  indeed,  not  long  after  Mr.  Spooner's  death;  but 
the  manner  of  its  abolition  would  have  given  him  less 
comfort  even  than  its  introduction.  It  was  abolished 
when  Mr.  Gladstone's  Government  abolished  the  State 
Church  in  Ireland. 

Another  of  Peel's  measures  which  aroused  much  clamor 
on  both  sides  was  that  for  the  establishment  of  what  were 
afterward  called  the  "  godless  colleges "  in  Ireland. 
O'Connell  has  often  had  the  credit  of  applying  this  nick- 
name to  the  new  colleges ;  but  it  was,  in  fact,  from  the 
extremest  of  all  no-popery  men,  Sir  Robert  Harry  Inglis, 
that  the  expression  came.  It  was,  indeed,  from  Sir  Robert 
Inglis's  side  that  the  first  note  sounded  of  opposition  to 
the  scheme,  although  O'Connell  afterward  took  it  vigor- 
ously up,  and  the  Pope  and  the  Irish  bishops  condemned 
the  colleges. 

There  was  objection  within  the  ministry,  as  well  as 
without.  Mr.  Gladstone,  who  had  been  doing  admirable 
work,  first  as  Vice-president,  and  afterward  as  President, 
of  the  Board  of  Trade,  and  who  had  supported  the  Queen's 
colleges  scheme  by  voice  and  vote,  resigned  his  office  be- 
cause of  the  Maynooth  grant.  He  acted,  perhaps,  with  a 
too  sensitive  chivalry.  He  had  written  a  work,  as  all  the 
world  knows,  on  the  relation  of  Church  and  State,  and  he 
did  not  think  the  views  expressed  in  that  book  left  him 


262  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

free  to  co-operate  the  ministerial  measure.  Some  staid 
politicians  were  shocked ;  many  more  smiled ;  not  a  few 
sneered.  The  public  in  general  applauded  the  spirit  of 
disinterestedness  which  dictated  the  young  statesman's 
act. 

The  proposal  of  the  Government  was  to  establish  in 
Ireland  three  colleges — one  in  Cork,  the  second  in  Belfast, 
and  the  third  in  Galway — and  to  affiliate  these  to  a  new 
university,  to  be  called  the  "  Queen's  University  in  Ire- 
land." The  teaching  in  these  colleges  was  to  be  purely 
secular.  Nothing  could  be  more  admirable  than  the  in- 
tentions of  Peel  and  his  colleagues.  Nor  could  it  be 
denied  that  there  might  have  been  good  seeming  hope  for 
a  plan  which  thus  proposed  to  open  a  sort  of  neutral 
ground  in  the  educational  controversy.  But  from  both 
sides  of  the  House  and  from  the  extreme  party  hi  each 
Church  came  an  equally  fierce  denunciation  of  the  proposal 
to  separate  secular  from  religious  education.  Nor,  surely, 
could  the  claim  of  the  Irish  Catholics  be  said  even  by  the 
warmest  advocate  of  undenominational  education  to  have 
no  reason  on  its  side.  The  small  minority  of  Protestants 
in  Ireland  had  their  college  and  their  university  estab- 
lished as  a  distinctively  Protestant  institution.  Why 
should  not  the  great  majority  who  were  Catholics  ask  for 
something  of  the  same  kind  for  themselves  ?  Peel  carried 
his  measure ;  but  the  controversy  has  gone  on  ever  since, 
and  we  have  yet  to  see  whether  the  scheme  is  a  success 
or  a  failure. 

One  small  instalment  of  justice  to  a  much-injured  and 
long-suffering  religious  body  was  accomplished  without 
any  trouble  by  Sir  Robert  Peel's  Government.  This  was 
the  bill  for  removing  the  test  by  which  Jews  were  ex- 
cluded from  certain  municipal  offices.  A  Jew  might  be 
high-sheriff  of  a  county,  or  sheriff  of  London,  but  with  an 
inconsistency  which  was  as  ridiculous  as  it  was  narrow- 


PEEL'S  ADMINISTRATION.  263 

minded,  he  was  prevented  from  becoming  a  mayor,  an 
alderman,  or  even  a  member  of  the  Common  Council.  The 
oath  which  had  to  be  taken  included  the  words  "  on  the 
true  faith  of  a  Christian."  Lord  Lyndhurst,  the  Lord 
Chancellor,  introduced  a  measure  to  get  rid  of  this  absurd 
anomaly ;  and  the  House  of  Lords,  who  had  firmly  re- 
jected similar  proposals  of  relief  before,  passed  it  without 
any  difficulty.  It  was,  of  course,  passed  by  the  House  of 
Commons,  which  had  done  its  best  to  introduce  the  reform 
in  previous  sessions,  and  without  success. 

The  Bank  Charter  Act,  separating  the  issue  from  the 
banking  department  of  the  Bank  of  England,  limiting  the 
issue  of  notes  to  a  fixed  amount  of  securities,  and  requir- 
ing the  whole  of  the  further  circulation  to  be  on  a  basis 
of  bullion,  and  prohibiting  the  formation  of  any  new  banks 
of  issue,  is  a  characteristic  and  an  important  measure  of 
Peel's  Government.  To  Peel,  too,  we  owe  the  establishment 
of  the  income-tax  on  its  present  basis — a  doubtful  boon. 
The  copyright  question  was,  at  least,  advanced  a  stage. 
Railways  were  regulated.  The  railway  mania  and  railway 
panic  also  belong  to  this  active  period.  The  country  went 
wild  with  railway  speculations.  The  South  Sea  scheme  was 
hardly  more  of  a  bubble,  or  hardly  burst  more  suddenly 
or  disastrously.  The  vulgar  and  flashy  successes  of  one 
or  two  lucky  adventurers  turned  the  heads  of  the  whole 
community.  For  a  time  it  seemed  to  be  a  national  article 
of  faith  that  the  capacity  of  the  country  to  absorb  new 
railway  schemes  and  make  them  profitable  was  unlimited, 
and  that  to  make  a  fortune  one  had  only  to  take  shares  in 
anything. 

An  odd  feature  of  the  time  was  the  outbreak  of  what 
were  called  the  Rebecca  riots  in  Wales.  These  riots  arose 
out  of  the  anger  and  impatience  of  the  people  at  the  great 
increase  of  toll-bars  and  tolls  on  the  public  roads.  Some 
one,  it  was  supposed,  had  hit  upon  a  passage  hi  Genesis 


204  A  IIISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

which  supplies  a  motto  for  their  grievance  and  their  com- 
plaint. "  And  they  blessed  Rebekah,  and  said  unto  her .  .  . 
let  thy  seed  possess  the  gate  of  those  of  which  hate  them." 
They  set  about,  accordingly,  to  possess  very  effectually 
the  gates  of  those  which  hated  them.  Mobs  assembled 
every  night,  destroyed  turnpikes,  and  dispersed.  They 
met  with  little  molestation  in  most  cases  for  awhile. 
The  mobs  were  always  led  by  a  man  in  woman's  clothes, 
supposed  to  represent  the  typical  Rebecca.  As  the  dis- 
turbances went  on,  it  was  found  that  no  easier  mode  of 
disguise  could  be  got  than  a  woman's  clothes,  and,  there- 
fore, in  many  of  the  riots  petticoats  might  almost  be  said 
to  be  the  uniform  of  the  insurgent  force.  Night  after 
night  for  months  these  midnight  musterings  took  place. 
Rebecca  and  her  daughters  became  the  terror  of  many 
regions.  As  the  work  went  on  it  became  more  serious. 
Rebecca  and  her  daughters  grew  bold.  There  were  con- 
flicts with  the  police  and  with  the  soldiers.  It  is  to  be 
feared  that  men  and  even  women  died  for  Rebecca.  At 
last  the  Government  succeeded  in  putting  down  the  riots, 
and  had  the  wisdom  to  appoint  a  commission  to  inquire 
into  the  cause  of  so  much  disturbance  ;  and  the  commis- 
sion, as  will  readily  be  imagined,  found  that  there  were 
genuine  grievances  at  the  bottom  of  the  popular  excite- 
ment. The  farmers  and  the  laborers  were  poor ;  the  tolls 
were  seriously  oppressive.  The  Government  dealt  lightly 
with  most  of  the  rioters  who  had  been  captured,  and  in- 
troduced measures  which  removed  the  grievances  most 
seriously  complained  of.  Rebecca  and  her  daughters  were 
heard  of  no  more.  They  had  made  out  their  case,  and 
done  in  their  wild  mumming  way  something  of  a  good 
work.  Only  a  short  time  before  the  rioters  would  have 
been  shot  down,  and  the  grievances  would  have  been  al- 
lowed to  stand.  Rebecca  and  her  short  career  mark  an  ad- 
vancement in  the  political  and  social  history  of  England. 


PEEL'S  ADMINISTRATION.  265 

Sir  James  Graham,  the  Home-secretary,  brought  him- 
self and  the  Government  into  some  trouble  by  the  manner 
in  which  he  made  use  of  the  power  invested  in  the  Ad- 
ministration for  the  opening  of  private  letters.  Mr.  Dun- 
combe,  the  Radical  member  for  Finsbury,  presented  a 
petition  from  Joseph  Mazzini  and  others  complaining  that 
letters  addressed  to  them  had  been  opened  in  the  Post-office. 
Many  of  Mazzini's  friends,  and  perhaps  Mazzini  himself, 
believed  that  the  contents  of  these  letters  had  been  com- 
municated to  the  Sardinian  and  Austrian  Governments, 
and  that,  as  a  result,  men  who  were  supposed  to  be  im- 
plicated in  projects  of  insurrection  on  the  Continent  had 
actually  been  arrested  and  put  to  death.  Sir  James 
Graham  did  not  deny  that  he  had  issued  a  warrant  au- 
thorizing the  opening  of  some  of  Mazzini's  letters ;  but  he 
contended  that  the  right  to  open  letters  had  been  specially 
reserved  to  the  Government  on  its  responsibility,  that  it 
had  been  always  exercised,  but  by  him  with  special  cau- 
tion and  moderation  ;  and  that  it  would  be  impossible  for 
any  Government  absolutely  to  deprive  itself  of  such  a 
right.  The  public  excitement  was  at  first  very  great ; 
but  it  soon  subsided.  The  reports  of  Parliamentary  com- 
mittees appointed  by  the  two  Houses  showed  that  all 
Governments  had  exercised  the  right,  but  naturally  with 
decreasing  frequency  and  greater  caution  of  late  years  ; 
and  that  there  was  no  chance  now  of  its  being  seriously 
abused.  No  one,  not  even  Thomas  Carlyle,  who  had  writ- 
ten to  the  Times  in  generous  indignation  at  the  opening 
of  Mazzini's  letters,  went  so  far  as  to  say  that  such  a  right 
should  never  be  exercised.  Carlyle  admitted  that  he 
would  tolerate  the  practice  "  when  some  new  Gunpowder 
Plot  may  be  in  the  wind,  s,ome  double-dyed  high-treason 
or  imminent  national  wreck  not  avoidable  otherwise." 
In  the  particular  case  of  Mazzini  it  seemed  an  odious  trick, 
and  every  one  was  ashamed  of  it.  Such  a  feeling  was  the 


266  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

surest  guard  against  abuse  for  the  future,  and  the  matter 
was  allowed  to  drop.  The  minister  is  to  be  pitied  who  is 
compelled  even  by  legitimate  necessity  to  have  recourse 
to  such  an  expedient ;  he  would  be  despised  now  by  every 
decent  man  if  he  turned  to  it  without  such  justification. 
Many  years  had  to  pass  away  before  Sir  James  Graham 
was  free  from  innuendoes  and  attacks  on  the  ground  that 
he  had  'tampered  with  the  correspondence  of  an  exile. 
One  remark,  on  the  other  hand,  it  is  right  to  make.  An 
exile  is  sheltered  in  a  country  like  England,  on  the  as- 
sumption that  he  does  not  involve  her  hi  responsibility 
and  danger  by  using  her  protection  as  a  shield  behind 
which  to  contrive  plots  and  organize  insurrections  against 
foreign  Governments.  It  is  certain  that  Mazzini  did  make 
use  of  the  shelter  England  gave  him  for  such  a  purpose. 
It  would  hi  the  end  be  to  the  heavy  injury  of  all  fugi- 
tives from  despotic  rule  if  to  shelter  them  brought  such 
consequences  on  the  countries  that  offered  them  a  home. 
The  Peel  Administration  was  made  memorable  by  many 
remarkable  events  at  home  as  well  as  abroad.  It  had,  as 
we  have  seen,  inherited  wars  and  brought  them  to  a  close : 
it  had  wars  of  its  own.  Scinde  was  annexed  by  Lord 
Ellenborough  hi  consequence  of  the  disputes  which  had 
arisen  between  us  and  the  Ameers,  whom  we  accused  of 
having  broken  faith  with  us.  They  were  said  to  be  in 
correspondence  with  our  enemies,  which  may  possibly 
have  been  true,  and  to  have  failed  to  pay  up  our  tribute, 
which  was  very  likely.  Anyhow  we  found  occasion  for 
an  attack  on  Scinde ;  and  the  result  was  the  total  defeat 
of  the  Princes  and  their  army,  and  the  annexation  of  the 
territory.  Sir  Charles  Napier  won  a  splendid  victory — 
splendid,  that  is,  in  a  military  sense — over  an  enemy  out- 
numbering him  by  more  than  twelve  to  one  at  the  battle  of 
Meeanee ;  and  Scinde  was  ours.  Peel  and  his  colleagues 
accepted  the  annexation.  None  of  them  liked  it ;  but  none 


PEEL'S  ADMINISTRATION.  267 

saw  how  it  could  be  undone.  There  was  nothing  to  be 
proud  of  in  the  matter,  except  the  courage  of  our  soldiers, 
and  the  genius  of  Sir  Charles  Napier,  one  of  the  most  bril- 
liant, daring,  successful,  eccentric,  and  self-conceited  cap- 
tains who  had  ever  fought  in  the  service  of  England  since 
the  days  of  Peterborough.  Later  on,  the  Sikhs  invaded 
our  territory  by  crossing  the  Sutlej  in  great  force.  Sir 
Hugh  Gough,  afterward  Lord  Gough,  fought  several  fierce 
battles  with  them  before  he  could  conquer  them ;  and  even 
then  they  were  only  conquered  for  the  time. 

We  were  at  one  moment  apparently  on  the  very  verge 
of  what  must  have  proved  a  far  more  serious  war  much 
nearer  home,  in  consequence  of  the  dispute  that  arose 
between  this  country  and  France  about  Tahiti  and  Queen 
Pomare.  Queen  Pomare  was  sovereign  of  the  island  of 
Tahiti,  hi  the  South  Pacific,  the  Otaheite  of  Captain  Cook. 
She  was  a  pupil  of  some  of  our  missionaries,  and  was  very 
friendly  to  England  and  its  people.  She  had  been  in- 
duced or  compelled  to  put  herself  and  her  dominion  under 
the  protection  of  France ;  a  step  which  was  highly  dis- 
pleasing to  her  subjects.  Some  ill-feeling  toward  the 
French  residents  of  the  island  was  shown ;  and  the  French 
admiral,  who  had  induced  or  compelled  the  Queen  to  put 
herself  under  French  protection,  now  suddenly  appeared 
off  the  coast,  and  called  on  her  to  hoist  the  French  flag 
above  her  own.  She  refused;  and  he  instantly  effected  a 
landing  on  the  island,  pulled  down  her  flag,  raised  that  of 
France  in  its  place,  and  proclaimed  that  the  island  was 
French  territory.  The  French  admiral  appears  to  have 
been  a  hot-headed,  thoughtless  sort  of  man,  the  Commo- 
dore Wilkes  of  his  day.  His  act  was  at  once  disavowed 
by  the  French  Government,  and  condemned  in  strong 
terms  by  M.  Guizot.  But  Queen  Pomare  had  appealed  to 
the  Queen  of  England  for  assistance.  "  Do  not  cast  me 
away,  my  friend, "  she  said ;  "  I  run  to  you  for  refuge,  to 


268  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

be  covered  under  your  great  shadow,  the  same  that  af- 
forded relief  to  my  fathers  by  your  fathers,  who  are  now 
dead,  and  whose  kingdoms  have  descended  to  us,  the 
weaker  vessels."  A  large  party  in  France  allowed  them- 
selves to  become  inflamed  with  the  idea  that  British  in- 
trigue was  at  the  bottom  of  the  Tahiti  people's  dislike  to 
the  protectorate  of  France,  and  that  England  wanted  to 
get  Queen  Pomare's  dominions  for  herself.  They  cried 
out,  therefore,  that  to  take  down  the  flag  of  France  from 
its  place  in  Tahiti  would  be  to  insult  the  dignity  of  the 
French  nation,  and  to  insult  it  at  the  instance  of  England. 
The  cry  was  echoed  hi  the  shrillest  tones  by  a  great  num- 
ber of  French  newspapers.  Where  the  flag  of  France  has 
once  been  hoisted,  they  screamed,  it  must  never  be  taken 
down ;  which  is  about  equivalent  to  saying  that  if  a  man's 
officious  servant  carries  off  the  property  of  some  one  else, 
and  gives  it  to  his  master,  the  master's  dignity  is  lowered 
by  his  consenting  to  hand  it  back  to  its  owner.  In  the 
face  of  this  clamor  the  French  Government,  although  they 
disavowed  any  share  in  the  filibustering  of  their  admiral, 
did  not  show  themselves  in  great  haste  to  undo  what  he 
had  done.  Possibly  they  found  themselves  in  something 
of  the  same  difficulty  as  the  English  Government  in  regard 
to  the  annexation  of  Scinde.  They  could  not,  perhaps, 
with  great  safety  to  themselves  have  ventured  to  be  honest 
all  at  once ;  and  in  any  case  they  did  not  want  to  give  up 
the  protectorate  of  Tahiti.  While  the  more  hot-headed 
on  both  sides  of  the  English  Channel  were  thus  snarling 
at  each  other,  the  difficulty  was  immensely  complicated 
by  the  seizure  of  a  missionary  named  Pritchard,  who  had 
been  our  consul  in  the  island  up  to  the  deposition  of 
Pornare.  A  French  sentinel  had  been  attacked,  or  was 
said  to  have  been  attacked,  in  the  night,  and  in  con- 
sequence the  French  commandant  seized  Pritchard  hi 
reprisaj,  declaring  him  to  be  "  the  only  mover  and  insti- 


PEEL'S  ADMINISTRATION.  269 

gator  of  disturbances  among  the  natives."  Pritchard 
was  flung  into  prison,  and  only  released  to  be  expelled 
from  the  island.  He  came  home  to  England  with  his 
story ;  and  his  arrival  was  the  signal  for  an  outburst  of 
indignation  all  over  the  country.  Sir  Robert  Peel  and 
Lord  Aberdeen  alike  stigmatized  the  treatment  of  Prit- 
chard as  a  gross  and  intolerable  outrage ;  and  satisfaction 
was  demanded  of  the  French  Government.  The  King  and 
M.  Guizot  were  both  willing  that  full  justice  should  be 
done,  and  both  anxious  to  avoid  any  occasion  of  ill-feel- 
ing with  England.  The  King  had  lately  been  receiving, 
with  effusive  show  of  affection,  a  visit  from  our  Queen  in 
France,  and  was  about  to  return  it.  But  so  hot  was  pop- 
ular passion  on  both  sides,  that  it  would  have  needed 
stronger  and  juster  natures  than  those  of  the  King  and 
his  minister  to  venture  at  once  on  doing  the  right  thing. 
It  was  on  the  last  day  of  the  session  of  1844,  September 
5th,  that  Sir  Robert  Peel  was  able  to  announce  that  the 
French  Government  had  agreed  to  compensate  Pritchard 
for  his  sufferings  and  losses.  Queen  Pomare  was  nomi- 
nally restored  to  power,  but  the  French  protection  proved 
as  stringent  as  if  it  were  a  sovereign  rule.  She  might  as 
well  have  pulled  down  her  flag,  for  all  the  sovereign  right 
it  secured  to  her.  She  died  thirty-four  years  after,  and 
her  death  recalled  to  the  memory  of  the  English  public 
the  long-forgotten  fact  that  she  had  once  so  nearly  been 
the  cause  of  a  war  between  England  and  France. 

The  Ashburton  Treaty  and  the  Oregon  Treaty  belong 
alike  to  the  history  of  Peel's  Administration.  The  Ash- 
burton  Treaty  bears  date  August  9th,  1842,  and  arranges 
finally  the  north-western  boundary  between  the  British 
Provinces  of  North  America  and  the  United  States.  For 
many  years  the  want  of  any  clear  and  settled  understand- 
ing as  to  the  boundary  line  between  Canada  and  the  State  of 
Maine  had  been  a  source  of  some  disturbance  and  of  much 


270  A  HISTOEY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

controversy.  Arbitration  between  England  and  the  United 
States  had  been  tried  and  failed,  both  parties  declining 
the  award.  Sir  Robert  Peel  sent  out  Lord  Ashburton,  for- 
merly Mr.  Baring,  as  plenipotentiary,  to  Washington,  in 
1842,  and  by  his  intelligent  exertions  an  arrangement  was 
come  to  which  appears  to  have  given  mutual  satisfaction 
ever  since,  despite  of  the  sinister  prophesy  ings  of  Lord 
Palmerston  at  the  time.  The  Oregon  question  was  more 
complicated,  and  was  the  source  of  a  longer  controversy. 
More  than  once  the  dispute  about  the  boundary  line  in  the 
Oregon  region  had  very  nearly  become  an  occasion  for 
war  between  England  and  the  United  States.  In  Can- 
ning's time  there  was  a  crisis  during  which,  to  quote  the 
words  of  an  English  statesman,  war  could  have  been 
brought  about  by  the  holding  up  of  a  finger.  The  ques- 
tion in  dispute  was  as  to  the  boundary  line  between  Eng- 
lish and  American  territory  west  of  the  Rocky  Mountains. 
It  had  seemed  a  matter  of  little  importance  at  one  time, 
when  the  country  west  of  the  Rocky  Mountains  was  re- 
garded by  most  persons  as  little  better  than  a  desert  idle. 
But  when  the  vast  capacities  and  the  splendid  future  of 
the  Pacific  slope  began  to  be  recognized,  and  the  im- 
portance to  us  of  some  station  and  harbor  there  came  to 
be  more  and  more  evident,  the  dispute  naturally  swelled 
into  a  question  of  vital  interest  to  both  nations.  In  1818 
an  attempt  at  arrangement  was  made,  but  failed.  The 
two  Governments  then  agreed  to  leave  the  disputed  regions 
to  joint  occupation  for  ten  years,  after  which  the  subject 
was  to  be  opened  again.  When  the  end  of  the  first  term 
came  near,  Canning  did  his  best  to  bring  about  a  settle- 
ment, but  failed.  The  dispute  involved  the  ownership  of 
the  mouth  of  the  Columbia  River,  and  of  the  noble  island 
which  bears  the  name  of  Vancouver,  off  the  shore  of 
British  Columbia.  The  joint  occupancy  was  renewed  for 
an  indefinite  time ;  but  in  1843  the  President  of  the  United 


PEEL' 8  ADMINISTRATION,  271 

States  somewhat  peremptorily  called  for  a  final  settlement 
of  the  boundary.  The  question  was  eagerly  taken  up  by 
excitable  politicians  in  the  American  House  of  Represent- 
atives. For  more  than  two  years  the  Oregon  question 
became  a  party  cry  in  America.  With  a  large  proportion 
of  the  American  public,  including,  of  course,  nearly  all 
citizens  of  Irish  birth  or  extraction,  any  President  would 
have  been  popular  beyond  measure  who  had  forced  a  war 
on  England.  Calmer  and  wiser  councils  prevailed,  how- 
ever, on  both  sides.  Lord  Aberdeen,  our  Foreign  Secre- 
tary, was  especially  moderate  and  conciliatory.  He  offered 
a  compromise  which  was  at  last  accepted.  On  June  15th, 
1864,  the  Oregon  Treaty  settled  the  question  for  that  time 
at  least;  the  dividing  line  was  to  be  "the  forty-ninth 
degree  of  latitude,  from  the  Rocky  Mountains  west  to  the 
middle  of  the  channel  separating  Vancouver's  Island 
from  the  main-land ;  thence  southerly  through  the  mid- 
dle of  the  channel  and  of  Fuca's  Straits  to  the  Pacific. " 
The  channel  and  straits  were  to  be  free,  as  also  the  great 
northern  branch  of  the  Columbia  River.  In  other  words, 
Vancouver's  Island  remained  to  Great  Britain,  and  the 
free  navigation  of  the  Columbia  River  was  secured.  We 
have  said  that  the  question  was  settled,  "  for  that  time ; " 
because  an  important  part  of  it  came  up  again  for  settle- 
ment many  years  after.  The  commissioners  appointed  to 
determine  that  portion  of  the  boundary  which  was  to  run 
southerly  through  the  middle  of  the  channel  were  unable 
to  come  to  any  agreement  on  the  subject,  and  the  diver- 
gence of  the  claims  made  on  one  side  and  the  other  con- 
stituted a  new  question,  which  became  a  part  of  the 
famous  Treaty  of  Washington  in  1871,  and  was  finally 
settled  by  the  arbitration  of  the  Emperor  of  Germany. 
But  it  is  much  to  the  honor  of  the  Peel  Administration 
that  a  dispute  which  had  for  years  been  charged  with 
possibilities  of  war,  and  had  become  a  stock  subject  of 


272  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

political  agitation  in  America,  should  have  been  so  fur 
settled  as  to  be  removed  forever  after  out  of  the  category 
of  disputes  which  suggest  an  appeal  to  arms.  This  was 
one  of  the  last  acts  of  Peel's  Government,  and  it  was  not 
the  least  of  the  great  things  he  had  done.  We  have 
soon  to  tell  how  it  came  about  that  it  was  one  of  his 
latest  triumphs  ;  and  how  an  Administration  which  had 
come  into  power  with  such  splendid  promise,  and  had  ac- 
complished so  much  in  such  various  fields  of  legislation, 
was  brought  so  suddenly  to  a  fall.  The  story  is  one  of 
the  most  remarkable  and  important  chapters  in  the  his- 
tory of  English  politics  and  parties. 

During  Peel's  time  we  catch  a  last  glimpse  of  the 
famous  Arctic  navigator,  Sir  John  Franklin.  lie  sailed 
on  the  expedition  which  was  doomed  to  be  his  last,  on 
May  26th,  1845,  with  his  two  vessels,  Erebus  and  Terror. 
Not  much  more  is  heard  of  him  as  among  the  living.  We 
may  say  of  him  as  Carlyle  says  of  La  Perouse,  "  The  brave 
navigator  goes  and  returns  not ;  the  seekers  search  far 
seas  for  him  in  vain ;  only  some  mournful,  mysterious 
shadow  of  him  hovers  long  in  all  heads  and  hearts. " 


FREE-TRADE  AND  THE  LEAGUE.  273 


CHAPTER  XIV. 

FREE-TRADE  AND  THE  LEAGUE. 

FEW  chapters  of  political  history  in  modern  times  have 
given  occasion  for  more  controversy  than  that  which  con- 
tains the  story  of  Sir  Robert  Peel's  Administration  in  its 
dealing  with  the  Corn-laws.  Told  in  the  briefest  form,  the 
story  is  that  Peel  came  into  office  in  1841  to  maintain  the 
Corn-laws,  and  that  in  1846  he  repealed  them.  The  con- 
troversy as  to  the  wisdom  or  unwisdom  of  repealing  the 
Corn-laws  has  long  since  come  to  an  end.  They  who  were 
the  uncompromising  opponents  of  Free-trade  at  that  time 
are  proud  to  call  themselves  its  uncompromising  zealots 
now.  Indeed,  there  is  no  more  chance  of  a  reaction  against 
Free-trade  in  England  than  there  is  of  a  reaction  against 
the  rule  of  three.  But  the  controversy  still  exists,  and 
will  probably  always  be  in  dispute,  as  to  the  conduct  of 
Sir  Robert  Peel. 

The  Melbourne  Ministry  fell,  as  we  have  seen,  in  conse- 
quence of  a  direct  vote  of  want  of  confidence  moved  by 
their  leading  opponent,  and  the  return  of  a  majority  hos- 
tile to  them  at  the  general  election  that  followed.  The 
vote  of  want  of  confidence  was  levelled  against  their 
financial  policy,  especially  against  Lord  John  Russell's 
proposal  to  substitute  a  fixed  duty  of  eight  shillings  for 
Peel's  sliding  scale.  Sir  Robert  Peel  came  into  office,  and 
he  introduced  a  reorganized  scheme  of  a  sliding  scale, 
reducing  the  duties  and  improving  the  system,  but  main- 

18 


274  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

taining  the  principle.  Lord  John  Russell  proposed  an 
amendment  declaring  that  the  House  of  Commons,  "  con- 
sidering the  evils  which  have  been  caused  by  the  present 
Corn-laws,  and  especially  by  the  fluctuation  of  the  grad- 
uated or  sliding  scale,  is  not  prepared  to  adopt  the  measure 
of  her  Majesty's  Government,  which  is  founded  on  the 
same  principles,  and  is  likely  to  be  attended  by  similar  re- 
sults." The  amendment  was  rejected  by  a  large  majority, 
no  less  than  one  hundred  and  twenty-three.  But  the  ques- 
tion between  Free-trade  and  Protection  was  even  more 
distinctly  raised.  Mr.  Villiers  proposed  another  amend- 
ment declaring  for  the  entire  abolition  of  all  duties  on 
grain.  Only  ninety  votes  were  given  for  the  amendment, 
while  three  hundred  and  ninety- three  were  recorded 
against  it.  Sir  Robert  Peel's  Government,  therefore,  came 
into  power  distinctly  pledged  to  uphold  the  principle  of 
protection  for  home-grown  grain.  Four  years  after  this 
Sir  Robert  Peel^  proposed  the  total  abolition,  of  the  corn 
duties.  For  this  he  was  denounced  by  some  members  of 
his  party  in  language  more  fierce  and  unmeasured  than 
ever  since  has  been  applied  to  any  leading  statesman. 
Mr.  Gladstone  was  never  assailed  by  the  stanchest  sup- 
porter of  the  Irish  Church  in  words  so  vituperative  as 
those  which  rated  Sir  Robert  Peel  for  his  supposed  apos- 
tasy. One  eminent  person,  at  least,  made  his  first  fame  as 
a  Parliamentary  orator  by  his  denunciations  of  the  great 
minister  whom  he  had  previously  eulogized  and  sup- 
ported. 

"  The  history  of  agricultural  distress,"  it  has  been  well 
observed,  "  is  the  history  of  agricultural  abundance." 
This  looks  at  first  sight  a  paradox  ;  but  nothing  can  in 
reality  be  more  plain  and  less  paradoxical.  "  Whenever," 
to  follow  out  the  passage,  "  Providence,  through  the  bless- 
ing of  genial  seasons,  fills  the  nation's  stores  with  plen- 
teousness,  then,  and  then  only,  has  the  cry  of  rum  to  the 


FREE-TRADE  AND  TUE  LEAGUE.  275 

cultivator  been  proclaimed  as  the  one  great  evil  for  legisla- 
tion to  repress."  This  is,  indeed,  the  very  meaning  of 
the  principle  of  protection.  When  the  commodity  which 
the  protected  interest  has  to  dispose  of  is  so  abundant  as 
to  be  easily  attained  by  the  common  body  of  consumers, 
then,  of  course,  the  protected  interest  is  injured  in  its  par- 
ticular way  of  making  money,  and  expects  the  State  to  do 
something  to  secure  it  in  the  principal  advantage  of  its 
monopoly.  The  greater  quantity  of  grain  a  good  harvest 
brings  for  the  benefit  of  all  the  people,  the  less  the  price 
the  corn-grower  can  charge  for  it.  His  interest  as  a  mon- 
opolist is  always  and  inevitably  opposed  to  the  interest 
of  the  community. 

But  it  is  easy  even  now,  when  we  have  almost  forgotten 
the  days  of  protection,  to  see  that  the  corn-grower  is  not 
likely  either  to  recognize  or  to  admit  this  conflict  of  inter- 
ests between  his  protection  and  the  public  welfare.  Apart 
from  the  natural  tendency  of  every  man  to  think  that 
that  which  does  him  good  must  do  good  to  the  community, 
there  was,  undoubtedly,  something  very  fascinating  in 
the  theory  of  protection.  It  had  a  charming  give  and 
take,  live  and  let  live,  air  about  it.  "  You  give  me  a  little 
more  than  the  market  price  for  my  corn,  and  don't  you 
see  I  shall  be  able  to  buy  all  the  more  of  your  cloth  and 
tea  and  sugar,  or  to  pay  you  the  higher  rent  for  your  land  ?" 
Such  a  compact  seems  reasonable  and  tempting.  Almost 
up  to  our  own  time  the  legislation  of  the  country  was  in 
the  hands  of  the  classes  who  had  more  to  do  with  the 
growing  of  corn  and  the  ownership  of  land  than  with  the 
making  of  cotton  and  the  working  of  machinery.  The 
great  object  of  legislation  and  of  social  compacts  of  what- 
ever kind  seemed  to  be  to  keep  the  rents  of  the  land- 
owners and  the  prices  of  the  farmers  up  to  a  comfortable 
standard.  It  is  not  particularly  to  the  discredit  of  the 
landlords  and  the  farmers  that  this  was  so.  We  have 


276  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

Been,  in  later  times,  how  every  class  in  succession  has 
resisted  the  movement  of  the  principle  of  Free-trade  when 
it  came  to  be  applied  to  its  own  particular  interests.  The 
paper  manufacturers  liked  it  as  little  in  1860,  as  the  land- 
lords and  farmers  had  done  fifteen  years  earlier.  "When 
the  cup  comes  to  be  commended  to  the  lips  of  each  in- 
terest in  turn,  we  always  find  that  it  is  received  as  a  poi- 
soned chalice,  and  taken  with  much  shuddering  and  pas- 
sionate protestation.  The  particular  advantage  possessed 
by  vested  interests  in  the  Corn-laws  was  that  for  a  long 
time  the  landlords  possessed  all  the  legislative  power  and 
all  the  prestige  as  well.  There  was  a  certain  reverence 
and  sanctity  about  the  ownership  of  land,  with  its  hered- 
itary descent  and  its  patriarchal  dignities,  which  the 
manufacture  of  paper  could  not  pretend  to  claim. 

If  it  really  were  true  that  the  legitimate  incomes  or  the 
legitimate  influence  of  the  landlord  class  in  England  went 
down  in  any  way  because  of  the  repeal  of  the  Corn-laws, 
it  would  have  to  be  admitted  that  the  landlords,  like  the 
aristocrats  before  the  French  Revolution,  had  done  some- 
thing themselves  to  encourage  the  growth  of  new  and  dis- 
turbing ideas.  Before  the  Revolution,  free  thought  and 
the  equality  and  brotherhood  of  man  were  beginning  to  be 
pet  doctrines  among  the  French  nobles  and  among  their 
wives  and  daughters.  It  was  the  whim  of  the  hour  to 
talk  Rousseau,  and  to  affect  indifference  to  rank,  and  a 
general  faith  hi  a  good  time  coming  of  equality  and 
brotherhood.  In  something  of  the  same  fashion  the  aris- 
tocracy of  England  were  for  some  time  before  the  repeal 
of  the  Corn-laws  illustrating  a  sort  of  revival  of  patriar- 
chal ideas  about  the  duties  of  property.  The  influence 
was  stirring  everywhere.  Oxford  was  beginning  to  busy 
itself  in  the  revival  of  the  olden  influence  of  the  Church. 
The  Young  England  party,  as  they  were  then  called, 
were  ardent  to  restore  the  good  old  days  when  the 


FREE-TRADE  AND  THE  LEAGUE.  277 

noble  was  the  father  of  the  poor  and  the  chief  of  his 
neighborhood.  All  manner  of  pretty  whimsies  were 
caught  up  with  this  ruling  idea  to  give  them  an  appear- 
ance of  earnest  purpose.  The  young  landlord  exhibited 
himself  in  the  attitude  of  a  protector,  patron,  and  friend 
to  all  his  tenants.  Doles  were  formally  given  at  stated 
hours  to  all  who  would  come  for  them  to  the  castle  gate. 
Young  noblemen  played  cricket  with  the  peasants  on  their 
estate,  and  the  Saturnian  Age  was  believed  by  a  good 
many  persons  to  be  returning  for  the  express  benefit  of 
Old,  or  rather  of  Young,  England.  There  was  something 
like  a  party  being  formed  in  Parliament  for  the  realiza- 
tion of  Young  England's  idyllic  purposes.  It  comprised 
among  its  numbers  several  more  or  less  gifted  youths  of 
rank,  who  were  full  of  enthusiasm  and  poetic  aspirations 
and  nonsense ;  and  it  had  the  encouragement  and  support 
of  one  man  of  genius,  who  had  no  natural  connection  with 
the  English  aristocracy,  but  who  was  afterward  destined 
to  be  the  successful  leader  of  the  Conservative  and  aristo- 
cratic party ;  to  be  its  savior  when  it  was  all  but  down  in 
the  dust ;  to  guide  it  to  victory,  and  make  it  once  more, 
for  the  time  at  least,  supreme  in  the  political  life  of  the 
country.  This  brilliant  champion  of  Conservatism  has 
often  spoken  of  the  repeal  of  the  Corn-laws  as  the  fall  of 
the  landlord  class  in  England.  If  the  landlords  fell,  it 
must  be  said  of  them,  as  has  been  fairly  said  of  many  a 
dynasty,  that  they  never  deserved  better,  on  the  whole, 
than  just  at  the  time  when  the  blow  struck  them  down. 

The  famous  Corn-law  of  1815  was  a  copy  of  the  Corn- 
law  of  1670.  The  former  measure  imposed  a  duty  on  the 
importation  of  foreign  grain  which  amounted  to  prohibi- 
tion. Wheat  might  be  exported  upon  the  payment  of  one 
shilling  per  quarter  customs  duty ;  but  importation  was 
practically  prohibited  until  the  price  of  wheat  had  reached 
eighty  shillings  a  quarter.  The  Corn-law  of  1815  was 


278  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

hurried  through  Parliament,  absolutely  closing  the  ports 
against  the  importation  of  foreign  grain  until  the  price  of 
our  home-grown  grain  had  reached  the  magic  figure  of 
eighty  shillings  a  quarter.  It  was  hurried  through,  de- 
spite the  most  earnest  petitions  from  the  commercial  and 
manufacturing  classes.  A  great  deal  of  popular  disturb- 
ance attended  the  passing  of  the  measure.  There  were 
riots  in  London,  and  the  houses  of  several  of  the  support- 
ers of  the  bill  were  attacked.  Incendiary  fires  blazed  in 
many  parts  of  the  country.  In  the  Isle  of  Ely  there  were 
riots  which  lasted  for  two  days  and  two  nights,  and  the 
aid  of  the  military  had  to  be  called  in  to  suppress  them. 
Five  persons  were  hanged  as  the  result  of  these  disturb- 
ances. One  might  excuse  a  demagogue  who  compared 
the  event  to  the  suppression  of  some  of  the  food  riots  in 
France  just  before  the  Revolution,  of  which  we  only  read 
that  the  people — the  poor,  that  is  to  say — turned  out  de- 
manding bread,  and  the  ringleaders  were  immediately 
hanged,  and  there  was  an  end  of  the  matter.  After  the 
Corn-law  of  1815,  thus  ominously  introduced,  there  were 
Sliding-scale  Acts,  having  for  their  business  to  establish 
a  varying  system  of  duty,  so  that,  according  as  the  price 
of  home-produced  wheat  rose  to  a  certain  height,  the  duty 
on  imported  wheat  sank  in  proportion.  The  principle  of 
all  these  measures  was  the  same.  It  was  founded  on  the 
assumption  that  the  corn  grew  for  the  benefit  of  the 
grower  first  of  all ;  and  that  until  he  had  been  secured  in 
a  handsome  profit  the  public  at  large  had  no  right  to  any 
reduction  in  the  cost  of  food.  When  the  harvest  was  a 
good  one,  and  the  golden  grain  was  plenty,  then  the  soul 
of  the  grower  was  afraid,  and  he  called  out  to  Parliament 
to  protect  him  against  the  calamity  of  having  to  sell  his 
corn  any  cheaper  than  in  years  of  famine.  He  did  not  see 
all  the  time  that  if  the  prosperity  of  the  country  in  gen- 
eral was  enchanced,  he  too  must  come  to  benefit  by  it. 


FREE-TRADE  AND  THE  LEAGUE.  279 

Naturally  it  was  in  places  like  Manchester  that  the 
fallacy  of  all  this  theory  was  first  commonly  perceived 
and  most  warmly  resented.  The  Manchester  manufac- 
turers saw  that  the  customers  for  their  goods  were  to  be 
found  in  all  parts  of  the  world ;  and  they  knew  that  at 
every  turn  they  were  hampered  in  their  dealings  with  the 
customers  by  the  system  of  protective  duties.  They 
wanted  to  sell  their  goods  wherever  they  could  find  buyers, 
and  they  chafed  at  any  barrier  between  them  and  the  sale. 
Manchester,  from  the  time  of  its  first  having  Parliament- 
ary representation — only  a  few  years  before  the  founda- 
tion of  the  Anti- Corn-law  League — had  always  spoken 
out  for  Free-trade.  The  fascinating  sophism  which  had 
such  charms  for  other  communities,  that  by  paying  more 
than  was  actually  necessary  for  everything  all  round, 
Dick  enriched  Tom,  while  Tom  was  at  the  same  time  en- 
riching Dick,  had  no  charms  for  the  intelligence  and  the 
practical  experience  of  Manchester.  The  close  of  the  year 
1836  was  a  period  of  stagnant  trade  and  general  depres- 
sion, arising,  in  some  parts  of  the  country,  to  actual  and 
severe  suffering.  Some  members  of  Parliament  and  other 
influential  men  were  stricken  with  the  idea,  which  it  does 
not  seem  to  have  required  much  strength  of  observation 
to  foster,  that  it  could  not  be  for  the  advantage  of  the 
country  in  general  to  have  the  price  of  bread  very  high  at 
a  time  when  wages  were  very  low  and  work  was  scarce. 
A  movement  against  the  Corn-laws  began  in  London.  An 
Anti-Corn-law  Association  on  a  small  scale  was  formed. 
Its  list  of  members  bore  the  names  of  more  than  twenty 
members  of  Parliament,  and  for  a  time  the  society  had 
a  look  of  vigor  about  it.  It  came  to  nothing,  however. 
London  has  never  been  found  an  effective  nursery  of  agi- 
tation. It  is  too  large  to  have  any  central  interest  or 
source  of  action.  It  is  too  dependent,  socially  and  econom- 
ically, on  the  patronage  of  the  higher  and  wealthier 


280  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

classes.  London  has  never  been  to  England  what  Paris 
has  been  to  France.  It  has  hardly  ever  made  or  repre- 
sented thoroughly  the  public  opinion  of  England  during 
any  great  crisis.  A  new  centre  of  operations  soon  had 
to  be  sought,  and  various  causes  combined  to  make  Lan- 
cashire the  proper  place.  In  the  year  1838  the  town  of 
Bolton-le-Moors,  in  Lancashire,  was  the  victim  of  a  terri- 
ble commercial  crisis.  Thirty  out  of  the  fifty  manufac- 
turing establishments  which  the  town  contained  were 
closed ;  nearly  a  fourth  of  all  the  houses  of  business  were 
closed  and  actually  deserted ;  and  more  than  five  thousand 
workmen  were  without  homes  or  means  of  subsistence. 
All  the  intelligence  and  energy  of  Lancashire  was  roused. 
One  obvious  guarantee  against  starvation  was  cheap  bread, 
and  cheap  bread  meant,  of  course,  the  abolition  of  the 
Corn-laws,  for  these  laws  were  constructed  on  the  prin- 
ciple that  it  was  necessary  to  keep  bread  dear.  A  meeting 
was  held  hi  Manchester  to  consider  measures  necessary 
to  be  adopted  for  bringing  about  the  complete  repeal  of 
these  laws.  The  Manchester  Chamber  of  Commerce 
adopted  a  petition  to  Parliament  against  the  Corn-laws. 
The  Anti-Corn-law  agitation  had  been  fairly  launched. 

From  that  time  it  grew,  and  grew  in  importance  and 
strength.  Meetings  were  held  in  various  towns  of  Eng- 
land and  Scotland.  Associations  were  formed  everywhere 
to  co-operate  with  the  movement,  which  had  its  head- 
quarters in  Manchester.  In  Newall's  Buildings,  Market 
Street,  Manchester,  the  work  of  the  League  was  really 
done  for  years.  The  leaders  of  the  movement  gave  up 
their  time  day  by  day  to  its  service.  The  League  had  to 
encounter  a  great  deal  of  rather  fierce  opposition  from  the 
Chartists,  who  loudly  proclaimed  that  the  whole  move- 
ment was  only  meant  to  entrap  them  once  more  into  an 
alliance  with  the  middle  classes  and  the  employers,  as  in 
the  case  of  the  Reform  Bill,  in  order  that  when  they  had 


FREE-TRADE  AND  TUE  LEAGUE.  281 

been  made  the  cat's-paw  again  they  might  again  be  thrown 
contemptuously  aside.  On  the  other  hand,  the  League 
had  from  the  first  the  cordial  co-operation  of  Daniel 
O'Comiell,  who  became  one  of  their  principal  orators  when 
they  held  meetings  in  the  metropolis.  They  issued  pam- 
phlets by  hundreds  of  thousands,  and  sent  lecturers  all 
over  the  country  explaining  the  principles  of  Free-trade. 
A  gigantic  propaganda  of  Free-trade  opinions  was  called 
into  existence.  Money  was  raised  by  the  holding  of  bazars 
in  Manchester  and  in  London,  and  by  calling  for  subscrip- 
tions. A  bazar  in  Manchester  brought  in  ten  thousand 
pounds ;  one  in  London  raised  rather  more  than  double 
that  sum,  not  including  the  subscriptions  that  were  con- 
tributed. A  Free-trade  Hall  was  built  in  Manchester. 
This  building  had  an  interesting  history  full  of  good  omen 
for  the  cause.  The  ground  on  which  the  hall  was  erected 
was  the  property  of  Mr.  Cobden,  and  was  placed  by  him 
at  the  disposal  of  the  League.  That  ground  was  the  scene 
of  what  was  known  in  Manchester  as  the  Massacre  of 
Peterloo.  On  August  16th,  1819,  a  meeting  of  Manchester 
Reformers  was  held  on  that  spot,  which  was  dispersed  by 
an  attack  of  soldiers  and  militia,  with  the  loss  of  many 
lives.  The  memory  of  that  day  rankled  in  the  hearts  of 
the  Manchester  Liberals  for  long  after,  and  perhaps  no 
better  means  could  be  found  for  purifying  the  ground 
from  the  stain  and  the  shame  of  such  bloodshed  than  its 
dedication  by  the  modern  apostle  of  peace  and  Free-trade 
as  a  site  whereon  to  build  a  hall  sacred  to  the  promulga- 
tion of  his  favorite  doctrines. 

The  times  were  peculiarly  favorable  to  the  new  sort  of 
propaganda  which  came  into  being  with  the  Anti-Corn-law 
League.  A  few  years  before  such  an  agitation  would 
hardly  have  found  the  means  of  making  its  influence  felt 
all  over  the  country.  The  very  reduction  of  the  cost  of 
postage  alone  must  have  facilitated  its  labors  to  an  extent 


282  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

beyond  calculation.  The  inundation  of  the  country  with 
pamphlets,  tracts,  and  reports  of  speeches  would  have 
been  scarcely  possible  under  the  old  system,  and  would  in 
any  case  have  swallowed  up  a  far  larger  amount  of  money 
than  even  the  League  with  its  ample  resources  would  have 
been  able  to  supply.  In  all  parts  of  the  country  railways 
were  being  opened,  and  these  enabled  the  lecturers  of  the 
League  to  hasten  from  town  to  town  and  to  keep  the  cause 
always  alive  in  the  popular  mind.  All  these  advantages 
and  many  others  might,  however,  have  proved  of  little 
avail  if  the  League  had  not  from  the  first  been  in  the  hands 
of  men  who  seemed  as  if  they  came  by  special  appoint- 
ment to  do  its  work.  Great  as  the  work  was  which  the 
League  did,  it  will  be  remembered  in  England  almost  as 
much  because  of  the  men  who  won  the  success  as  on 
account  of  the  success  itself. 

The  nominal  leader  of  the  Free-trade  party  in  Parlia- 
ment was  for  many  years  Mr.  Charles  Villiers,  a  man  of 
aristocratic  family  and  surroundings,  of  remarkable 
ability,  and  of  the  steadiest  fidelity  to  the  cause  he  had  un- 
dertaken. Nothing  is  a  more  familiar  phenomenon  in  the 
history  of  English  political  agitation  than  the  aristocrat 
who  assumes  the  popular  cause  and  cries  out  for  the 
"  rights  "  of  the  "  unenfranchised  millions."  But  it  was 
something  new  to  find  a  man  of  Mr.  Villiers's  class  devot- 
ing himself  to  a  cause  so  entirely  practical  and  business- 
like as  that  of  the  repeal  of  the  Corn-laws.  Mr.  Villiers 
brought  forward  for  several  successive  sessions  in  the 
House  of  Commons  a  motion  in  favor  of  the  total  repeal 
of  the  Corn-laws.  His  eloquence  and  his  argumentative 
power  served  the  great  purpose  of  drawing  the  attention 
of  the  country  to  the  whole  question,  and  making  con- 
verts to  the  principle  he  advocated.  The  House  of  Com- 
mons has  always  of  late  years  been  the  best  platform  from 
which  to  address  the  country.  In  political  agitation  it 


FREE-TRADE  AND  THE  LEAGUE.  283 

has  thus  been  made  to  prepare  the  way  for  the  schemes 
of  legislation  which  it  has  itself  always  begun  by  repro- 
bating. But  Mr.  Villiers  might  have  gone  on  for  all  his 
life  dividing  the  House  of  Commons  on  the  question  of 
Free-trade,  without  getting  much  nearer  to  his  object,  if 
it  were  not  for  the  manner  in  which  the  cause  was  taken 
up  by  the  country,  and  more  particularly  by  the  great 
manufacturing  towns  of  the  North.  Until  the  passing  of 
Lord  Grey's  Reform  Bill  these  towns  had  no  representa- 
tion in  Parliament.  They  seemed  destined  after  that 
event  to  make  up  for  their  long  exclusion  from  represent- 
ative influence  by  taking  the  government  of  the  country 
into  their  own  hands.  Of  late  years  they  have  lost  some 
of  their  relative  influence.  They  have  not  now  all  the 
power  that  for  no  inconsiderable  time  they  undoubtedly 
possessed.  The  reforms  they  chiefly  aimed  at  have  been 
carried,  and  the  spirit  which  in  times  of  stress  and  struggle 
kept  their  populations  almost  of  one  mind  has  less  neces- 
sity of  existence  now.  Manchester,  Birmingham,  and 
Leeds  are  no  whit  less  important  to  the  life  of  the  nation 
now  than  they  were  before  Free-trade.  But  their  suprem- 
acy does  not  exist  now  as  it  did  then.  At  that  time  it 
was  town  against  country ;  Manchester  representing  the 
town,  and  the  whole  Conservative  (at  one  period  almost 
the  whole  land-owning)  body  representing  the  country. 
The  Manchester  school,  as  it  was  called,  then  and  for  long 
after  had  some  teachers  and  leaders  who  were  of  them- 
selves capable  of  making  any  school  powerful  and  re- 
spected. With  the  Manchester  school  began  a  new  kind 
of  popular  agitation.  Up  to  that  time  agitation  meant 
appeal  to  passion,  and  lived  by  provoking  passion.  Its 
cause  might  be  good  or  bad,  but  the  way  of  promoting  it 
was  the  same.  The  Manchester  school  introduced  the 
agitation  which  appealed  to  reason  and  argument  only ; 
which  stirred  men's  hearts  with  figures  of  arithmetic, 


234  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

rather  than  figures  of  speech,  and  which  converted  mob 
meetings  to  political  economy. 

The  real  leader  of  the  movement  was  Mr.  Richard  Cob- 
den.  Mr.  Cobden  was  a  man  belonging  to  the  yeoman 
class.  He  had  received  but  a  moderate  education.  His 
father  dying  while  the  great  Free-trader  was  still  young, 
Richard  Cobden  was  taken  in  charge  by  an  uncle,  who 
had  a  wholesale  warehouse  in  the  City  of  London,  and 
who  gave  him  employment  there.  Cobden  afterward 
became  a  partner  in  a  Manchester  printed-cotton  factory ; 
and  he  travelled  occasionally  on  the  commercial  business 
of  this  establishment.  He  had  a  great  liking  for  travel ; 
but  not  by  any  means  as  the  ordinary  tourist  travels ; 
the  interest  of  Cobden  was  not  in  scenery,  or  in  art,  or  in 
ruins,  but  in  men.  He  studied  the  condition  of  countries 
with  a  view  to  the  manner  in  which  it  affected  the  men 
and  women  of  the  present,  and  through  them  was  likely 
to  effect  the  future.  On  everything  that  he  saw  he 
turned  a  quick  and  intelligent  eye ;  and  he  saw  for  him- 
self and  thought  for  himself.  Wherever  he  went  he 
wanted  to  learn  something.  He  had  in  abundance  that 
peculiar  faculty  which  some  great  men  of  widely  differ- 
ent stamp  from  him  and  from  each  other  have  possessed ; 
of  which  Goethe  frankly  boasted,  and  which  Mirabeau 
had  more  largely  than  he  was  always  willing  to  acknowl- 
edge; the  faculty  which  exacts  from  every  one  with 
whom  its  owner  comes  into  contact  some  contribution  to 
his  stock  of  information  and  to  his  advantage.  Cobden 
could  learn  something  from  everybody.  It  is  doubtful 
whether  he  ever  came  even  into  momentary  acquaintance 
with  any  one  whom  he  did  not  compel  to  yield  him  some- 
thing in  the  way  of  information.  He  travelled  very 
widely  for  a  time,  when  travelling  was  more  difficult 
work  than  it  is  at  present.  He  made  himself  familiar 
with  most  of  the  countries  of  Europe,  with  many  parts  of 


FREE-TEADE  AND  THE  LEAGUE.  285 

the  East,  and,  what  was  then  a  rarer  accomplishment, 
with  the  United  States  and  Canada.  He  did  not  make 
the  familiar  grand  tour,  and  then  dismiss  the  places  he 
had  seen  from  his  active  memory.  He  studied  them,  and 
visited  many  of  them  again  to  compare  early  with  later 
impressions.  This  was  in  itself  .an  education  of  the  high- 
est value  for  the  career  he  proposed  to  pursue.  When  he 
was  about  thirty  years  of  age  he  began  to  acquire  a  cer- 
tain reputation  as  the  author  of  pamphlets  directed 
against  some  of  the  pet  doctrines  of  old-fashioned  states- 
manship— the  balance  of  power  in  Europe ;  the  necessity 
of  maintaining  a  State  Church  in  Ireland;  the  import- 
ance of  allowing  no  European  quarrel  to  go  on  without 
England's  intervention;  and  similar  dogmas.  Mr.  Cob- 
den's  opinions  then  were  very  much  as  they  continued  to 
the  day  of  his  death.  He  seemed  to  have  come  to  the 
maturity  of  his  convictions  all  at  once,  and  to  have  passed 
through  no  further  change  either  of  growth  or  of  decay. 
But  whatever  might  be  said  then  or  now  of  the  doctrines 
he  maintained,  there  could  be  only  one  opinion  as  to  the 
skill  and  force  which  upheld  them  with  pen  as  well  as 
tongue.  The  tongue;  however,  was  his  best  weapon.  If 
oratory  were  a  business  and  not  an  art — that  is,  if  its  test 
were  its  success  rather  than  its  form — then  it  might  be 
contended  reasonably  enough  that  Mr.  Cobden  was  one 
of  the  greatest  orators  England  has  ever  known.  Noth- 
ing could  exceed  the  persuasiveness  of  his  style.  His  man- 
ner was  simple,  sweet,  and  earnest.  It  was  persuasive, 
but  it  had  not  the  sort  of  persuasiveness  which  is  merely  a 
better  kind  of  plausibility.  It  persuaded  by  convincing. 
It  was  transparently  sincere.  The  light  of  its  convic- 
tions shone  all  through  it.  It  aimed  at  the  reason  and 
the  judgment  of  the  listener,  and  seemed  to  be  convinc- 
ing him  to  his  own  interest  against  his  prejudices.  Cob- 
den's  style  was  almost  exclusively  conversational ;  but  he 


286  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

had  a  clear,  well-toned  voice,  with  a  quiet,  unassuming 
power  in  it  which  enabled  him  to  make  his  words  heard 
distinctly  and  without  effort  all  through  the  great  meet- 
ings he  had  often  to  address.  His  speeches  were  full  of 
variety.  He  illustrated  every  argument  by  something 
drawn  from  his  personal  observation  or  from  reading,  and 
his  illustrations  were  always  striking,  appropriate,  and 
interesting.  He  had  a  large  amount  of  bright  and  win- 
ning humor,  and  he  spoke  the  simplest  and  purest  Eng- 
lish. He  never  used  an  unnecessary  sentence,  or  failed 
for  a  single  moment  to  make  his  meaning  clear.  Many 
strong  opponents  of  Mr.  Cobden's  opinions  confessed, 
even  during  his  lifetime,  that  they  sometimes  found  with 
dismay  their  most  cherished  convictions  crumbling  away 
beneath  his  flow  of  easy  argument.  In  the  stormy  times 
of  national  passion  Mr.  Cobden  was  less  powerful.  When 
the  question  was  one  to  be  settled  by  the  rules  that 
govern  man's  substantial  interests,  or  even  by  the  stand- 
ing rules,  if  such  an  expression  may  be  allowed,  of  mor- 
ality, then  Cobden  was  unequalled.  So  long  as  the  con- 
troversy could  be  settled  after  this  fashion — "  I  will  show 
you  that  in  such  a  course  you  are  acting  injuriously  to 
your  own  interests ; "  or  "  You  are  doing  what  a  fair  and 
just  man  ought  not  to  do  " — so  long  as  argument  of  that 
kind  could  sway  the  conduct  of  men,  then  there  was  no 
one  who  could  convince  as  Cobden  could.  But  when  the 
hour  and  mood  of  passion  came,  and  a  man  or  a  nation 
said,  "  I  do  not  care  any  longer  whether  this  is  for  my 
interest  or  not — I  don't  care  whether  you  call  it  right  or 
wrong — this  way  my  instincts  drive  me,  and  this  way  I 
am  going" — then  Mr.  Cobden's  teaching,  the  very  per- 
fection as  it  was  of  common-sense  and  fair  play,  was  out 
of  season.  It  could  not  answer  feeling  with  feeling.  It 
was  not  able  to  "  overcrow,"  in  the  word  of  Shakspeare 
and  Spencer,  one  emotion  by  another.  The  defect  of  Mr. 


FREE-TRADE  AND  THE  LEAGUE,  287 

Cobden's  style  of  mind  and  temper  is  fitly  illustrated  in 
the  deficiency  of  his  method  of  argument.  His  sort  of 
education,  his  modes  of  observation,  his  way  of  turning 
travel  to  account,  all  went  together  to  make  him  the  man 
he  was.  The  apostle  of  common-sense  and  fair  dealing, 
he  had  no  sympathy  with  the  passions  of  men ;  he  did 
not  understand  them  ;  they  passed  for  nothing  in  his  cal- 
culations. His  judgment  of  men  and  of  nations  was 
based  far  too  much  on  his  knowledge  of  his  own  motives 
and  character.  He  knew  that  in  any  given  case  he  could 
always  trust  himself  to  act  the  part  of  a  just  and  prudent 
man ;  and  he  assumed  that  all  the  world  could  be  gov- 
erned by  the  rules  of  prudence  and  of  equity.  History 
had  little  interest  for  him,  except  as  it  testified  to  man's 
advancement  and  steady  progress,  and  furnished  argu- 
ments to  show  that  men  prospered  by  liberty,  peace,  and 
just  dealings  with  their  neighbors.  He  cared  little  or 
nothing  for  mere  sentiments.  Even  where  these  had  their 
root  in  some  human  tendency  that  was  noble  in  itself,  he 
did  not  reverence  them  if  they  seemed  to  stand  in  the 
way  of  men's  acting  peacefully  and  prudently.  He  did 
not  see  why  the  mere  idea  of  nationality,  for  example, 
should  induce  people  to  disturb  themselves  by  insurrec- 
tions and  wars,  so  long  as  they  were  tolerably  well  gov- 
erned, and  allowed  to  exist  in  peace  and  to  make  an 
honest  living.  Thus  he  never  represented  more  than 
half  the  English  character.  He  was  always  out  of 
sympathy  with  his  countrymen  on  some  great  political 
question. 

But  he  seemed  as  if  he  were  designed  by  nature  to  con- 
duct to  success  such  an  agitation  as  that  against  the  Corn- 
laws.  He  found  some  colleagues  who  were  worthy  of  him 
His  chief  companion  in  the  campaign  was  Mr.  Bright.  Mr 
Bright's  fame  is  not  so  completely  bound  up  with  the 
repeal  of  the  Corn-laws,  or  even  with  the  extension  of  the 


288  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

suffrage,  as  that  of  Mr.  Cobden.  If  Mr.  Bright  had  been 
on  the  wrong  side  of  every  cause  he  pleaded;  if  his  agita- 
tion had  been  as  conspicuous  for  failure  as  it  was  for 
success,  he  would  still  be  famous  among  English  public 
men.  He  was  what  Mr.  Cobden  was  not,  an  orator  of  the 
very  highest  class.  It  is  doubtful  whether  English  public 
life  has  ever  produced  a  man  who  possessed  more  of  the 
qualifications  of  a  great  orator  than  Mr.  Bright.  lie  had 
a  commanding  presence ;  not,  indeed,  the  stately  and 
colossal  form  of  O'Connell,  but  a  massive  figure,  a  large 
head,  a  handsome  and  expressive  face.  His  voice  was 
powerful,  resonant,  clear,  with  a  peculiar  vibration  in  it 
which  lent  unspeakable  effect  to  any  passages  of  pathos 
or  of  scorn.  His  style  of  speaking  was  exactly  what  a 
conventional  demagogue's  ought  not  to  be.  It  was  pure 
to  austerity ;  it  was  stripped  of  all  superfluous  ornament. 
It  never  gushed  or  foamed.  It  never  allowed  itself  to  be 
mastered  by  passion.  The  first  peculiarity  that  struck 
the.  listener  was  its  superb  self-restraint.  The  orator  at 
his  most  powerful  passages  appeared  as  if  he  were  rather 
keeping  in  his  strength  than  taxing  it  with  effort.  His 
voice  was,  for  the  most  part,  calm  and  measured ;  he  hardly 
ever  indulged  in  much  gesticulation.  He  never,  under  the 
pressure  of  whatever  emotion,  shouted  or  stormed.  The 
fire  of  his  eloquence  was  a  white-heat,  intense,  consuming, 
but  never  sparkling  or  sputtering.  He  had  an  admirable 
gift  of  humor  and  a  keen  ironical  power.  He  had  read  few 
books,  but  of  those  he  read  he  was  a  master.  The  English 
Bible  and  Milton  were  his  chief  studies.  His  style  was 
probably  formed,  for  the  most  part,  on  the  Bible ;  for 
although  he  may  have  moulded  his  general  way  of  think- 
ing and  his  simple,  strong  morality  on  the  lessons  he  found 
in  Milton,  his  mere  language  bore  little  trace  of  Milton's 
stately  classicism  with  its  Hellenized  and  Latinized  ter- 
minology, but  was  above  all  things  Saxon  and  simple. 


FREE-TRADE  AND  THE  LEAGUE.  289 

Bright  was  a  man  of  the  middle-class.  His  family  were 
Quakers  of  a  somewhat  austere  mould.  They  were  manu- 
facturers of  carpets  in  Rochdale,  Lancashire,  and  had 
made  considerable  money  in  their  business.  John  Bright, 
therefore,  was  raised  above  the  temptations  which  often 
beset  the  eloquent  young  man  who  takes  up  a  democratic 
cause  in  a  country  like  ours ;  and,  as  our  public  opinion 
goes,  it  probably  was  to  his  advantage,  when  first  he 
made  his  appearance  in  Parliament,  that  he  was  well 
known  to  be  a  man  of  some  means,  and  not  a  clever  and 
needy  adventurer. 

Mr.  Bright  himself  has  given  an  interesting  account  of 
his  first  meeting  with  Mr.  Cobden : 

"  The  first  time  I  became  acquainted  with  Mr.  Cobden 
was  in  connection  with  the  great  question  of  education. 
I  went  over  to  Manchester  to  call  upon  him  and  invite 
him  to  come  to  Rochdale  to  speak  at  a  meeting  about  to 
be  held  in  the  school-room  of  the  Baptist  Chapel  in  West 
Street.  I  found  him  in  his  counting-house.  I  told  him 
what  I  wanted  ;  his  countenance  lighted  up  with  pleasure 
to  find  that  others  were  working  in  the  same  cause.  He, 
without  hesitation,  agreed  to  come.  He  came,  and  he 
spoke ;  and  though  he  was  then  so  young  a  speaker,  yet 
the  qualities  of  his  speech  were  such  as  remained  with 
him  so  long  as  he  was  able  to  speak  at  all — clearness, 
logic,  a  conversational  eloquence,  a  persuasiveness  which, 
when  combined  with  the  absolute  truth  there  was  in  his 
eye  and  in  his  countenance,  became  a  power  it  was  almost 
impossible  to  resist." 

Still  more  remarkable  is  the  description  Mr.  Bright  has 
given  of  Cobden's  first  appeal  to  him  to  join  in  the  agita- 
tion for  the  repeal  of  the  Corn-laws : 

"  I  was  in  Leamington,  and  Mr.  Cobden  called  on  me. 
I  was  then  hi  the  depths  of  grief — I  may  almost  say  of 
despair — for  the  light  and  sunshine  of  my  house  had  been 

19 


290  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

extinguished.  All  that  was  left  on  earth  of  ray  young 
wife,  except,  the  memory  of  a  sainted  life  and  a  too  brief 
happiness,  was  lying  still  and  cold  in  the  chamber  above 
us.  Mr.  Cobden  called  on  me  as  his  friend  and  addressed 
me,  as  you  may  suppose,  with  words  of  condolence. 
After  a  time  he  looked  up  and  said :  '  There  are  thou- 
sands and  thousands  of  homes  in  England  at  this  moment 
where  wives  and  mothers  and  children  are  dying  of 
hunger.  Now,  when  the  first  paroxysm  of  your  grief  is 
passed,  I  would  advise  you  to  come  with  me,  and  we  will 
never  rest  until  the  Corn-laws  are  repealed.' " 

The  invitation  thus  given  was  cordially  accepted,  and 
from  that  time  dates  the  almost  unique  fellowship  of  these 
two  men,  who  worked  together  in  the  closest  brother- 
hood, who  loved  each  other  as  not  all  brothers  do,  who 
were  associated  so  closely  in  the  public  mind  that  until 
Cobden's  death  the  name  of  one  was  scarcely  ever  men- 
tioned without  that  of  the  other.  There  was  something 
positively  romantic  about  their  mutual  attachment.  Each 
led  a  noble  life  ;  each  was  in  his  own  way  a  man  of  genius ; 
each  was  simple  and  strong.  Rivalry  between  them  would 
have  been  impossible,  although  they  were  every  day  being 
compared  and  contrasted  by  both  friendly  and  unfriendly 
critics.  Their  gifts  were  admirably  suited  to  make  them 
powerful  allies.  Each  had  something  that  the  other 
wanted.  Bright  had  not  Cobden's  winning  persuasive- 
ness nor  his  surprising  ease  and  force  of  argument.  But 
Cobden  had  not  anything  like  his  companion's  oratorical 
power.  He  had  not  the  tones  of  scorn,  of  pathos,  of 
humor,  and  of  passion.  The  two  together  made  a  genuine 
power  in  the  House  of  Commons  and  on  the  platform. 
Mr.  Kinglake,  who  is  as  little  in  sympathy  with  the  general 
political  opinions  of  Cobden  and  Bright  as  any  man  well 
could  be,  has  borne  admirable  testimony  to  their  argu- 
mentative power  and  to  their  influence  over  the  House  of 


FEEE-TEADE  AND  THE  LEAGUE.  291 

Commons  :  "  These  two  orators  had  shown  with  what  a 
strength,  with  what  a  masterly  skill,  with  what  patience, 
with  what  a  high  courage,  they  could  carry  a  scientific 
truth  through  the  storms  of  politics.  They  had  shown 
that  they  could  arouse  and  govern  the  assenting  thousands 
who  listened  to  them  with  delight — that  they  could  bend 
the  House  of  Commons — that  they  could  press  their  creed 
upon  a  Prime-minister,  and  put  upon  his  mind  so  hard  a 
stress,  that  after  awhile  he  felt  it  to  be  a  torture  and  a 
violence  to  his  reason  to  have  to  make  a  stand  against 
them.  Nay,  more.  Each  of  these  gifted  men  had  proved 
that  he  could  go  bravely  into  the  midst  of  angry  opponents, 
could  show  them  their  fallacies  one  by  one,  destroy  their 
favorite  theories  before  their  very  faces,  and  triumphantly 
argue  them  down."  It  was,  indeed,  a  scientific  truth 
which,  in  the  first  instance,  Cobden  and  Bright  undertook 
to  force  upon  the  recognition  of  a  Parliament  composed  in 
great  measure  of  the  very  men  who  were  taught  to  believe 
that  their  own  personal  and  class  interests  were  bound  up 
with  the  maintenance  of  the  existing  economical  creed. 
Those  who  hold  that  because  it  was  a  scientific  truth  the 
task  of  its  advocates  ought  to  have  been  easy,  will  do  well 
to  observe  the  success  of  the  resistance  which  has  been  thus 
far  offered  to  it  in  almost  every  country  but  England  alone. 
These  men  had  many  assistants  and  lieutenants  well 
worthy  to  act  with  them  and  under  them.  Mr.  W.  J.  Fox, 
for  instance,  a  Unitarian  minister  of  great  popularity 
and  remarkable  eloquence,  seemed  at  one  time  almost 
to  divide  public  admiration  as  an  orator  with  Mr.  Cobden 
and  Mr.  Bright.  Mr.  Milner  Gibson,  who  had  been  a 
Tory,  went  over  to  the  movement,  and  gave  it  the  assist- 
ance of  trained  Parliamentary  knowledge  and  very  con- 
siderable debating  skill.  In  the  Lancashire  towns  the 
League  had  the  advantage  of  being  officered  for  the  most 
part,  by  shrewd  and  sound  men  of  business,  who  gave 


292  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

their  time  as  freely  as  they  gave  their  money  to  the  ad- 
vancement of  the  cause.  It  is  curious  to  compare  the 
manner  in  which  the  Anti-Corn-law  agitation  was  con- 
ducted with  the  manner  in  which  the  contemporary  agita- 
tion in  Ireland  for  the  repeal  of  the  Union  was  carried  on. 
In  England  the  agitation  was  based  on  the  most  strictly 
business  principles.  The  leaders  spoke  and  acted  as  if 
the  League  itself  were  some  great  commercial  firm,  which 
was  bound,  above  all  things,  to  fulfil  its  promises  and 
keep  to  the  letter  as  well  as  the  spirit  of  its  engagements. 
There  was  no  boasting ;  there  was  no  exaggeration;  there 
were  no  appeals  to  passion ;  no  romantic  rousings  of  sen- 
timental emotion.  The  system  of  the  agitation  was  as 
clear,  straightforward,  and  business-like  as  its  purpose. 
In  Ireland  there  were  monster  meetings,  with  all  manner 
of  dramatic  and  theatric  effects — with  rhetorical  exagger- 
ation, and  vehement  appeal  to  passion  and  to  ancient 
memory  of  suffering.  The  cause  was  kept  up  from  day  to 
day  by  assurances  of  near  success  so  positive  that  it  is 
sometimes  hard  to  believe  those  who  made  them  could 
themselves  have  been  deceived  by  them.  No  doubt  the 
difference  will  be  described  by  many  as  the  mere  result 
of  the  difference  between  the  one  cause  and  the  other ; 
between  the  agitation  for  Free-trade,  clear,  tangible,  and 
practical,  and  that  for  repeal  of  the  Union,  with  its 
shadowy  object  and  its  visionary  impulses.  But  a  bet- 
ter explanation  of  the  difference  will  be  found  in  the 
different  natures  to  which  an  appeal  had  to  be  made.  It 
is  not  by  any  means  certain  that  O'ConnelPs  cause  was 
a  mere  shadow ;  nor  will  it  appear,  if  we  study  the  criti- 
cism of  the  time,  that  the  guides  of  public  opinion  who 
pronounced  the  repeal  agitation  absurd  and  ludicrous  had 
any  better  words  at  first  for  the  movement  against  the 
Corn-law.  Cobden  and  Bright  on  the  one  side,  O'Connell 
on  the  other,  knew  the  audiences  they  had  to  address.  It 


FEEE-TEADE  AND  TUE  LEAGUE.  293 

would  have  been  impossible  to  stir  the  blood  of  the  Lan- 
cashire artisan  by  means  of  the  appeals  which  went  to  the 
very  heart  of  the  dreamy,  sentimental,  impassioned  Celt 
of  the  South  of  Ireland.  The  Munster  peasant  would 
have  understood  little  of  such  clear,  penetrating,  business- 
like argument  as  that  by  which  Cobden  and  Bright  en- 
forced their  doctrines.  Had  O'Connell's  cause  been  as 
practical  and  its  success  been  as  immediately  attainable  as 
that  of  the  Anti-Corn-law  League,  the  great  Irish  agitator 
would  still  have  had  to  address  his  followers  in  a  differ- 
ent tone  of  appeal.  "  All  men  are  not  alike,"  says  the 
Norman  butler  to  the  Flemish  soldier  in  Scott's  "Be- 
trothed:" "that  which  will  but  warm  your  Flemish 
hearts  will  put  wildfire  into  Norman  brains ;  and  what 
may  only  encourage  your  countrymen  to  man  the  walls, 
will  make  ours  fly  over  the  battlements."  The  most  im- 
passioned Celt,  however,  will  admit  that  in  the  Anti-Corn- 
law  movement  of  Cobden  and  Bright,  with  its  rigid  truth- 
fulness and  its  strict  proportion  between  capacity  and 
promise,  there  was  an  entirely  new  dignity  lent  to  popu- 
lar agitation  which  raised  it  to  the  condition  of  statesman- 
ship in  the  rough.  The  Reform  agitation  in  England  had 
not  been  conducted  without  some  exaggeration,  much  ap- 
peal to  passion,  and  some  not  by  any  means  indistinct 
allusion  to  the  reserve  of  popular  force  which  might  be 
called  into  action  if  legislators  and  peers  proved  insensible 
to  argument.  The  era  of  the  Anti-Corn-law  movement 
was  a  new  epoch  altogether  in  English  political  controversy. 
The  League,  however,  successful  as  it  might  be 
throughout  the  country,  had  its  great  work  to  do  in  Par- 
liament. The  Free-trade  leaders  must  have  found  their 
hearts  sink  within  them  when  they  came  sometimes  to 
confront  that  fortress  of  traditions  and  of  vested  rights. 
Even  after  the  change  made  in  favor  of  manufacturing 
and  middle-class  interests  by  the  Reform  Bill,  the  House 


294  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

of  Commons  was  still  composed,  as  to  nine-tenths  of  its 
whole  number,  by  representatives  of  the  landlords.  The 
entire  House  of  Lords  then  was  constituted  of  the  owners 
of  land.  All  tradition,  all  prestige,  all  the  dignity  of 
aristocratic  institutions,  seemed  to  be  naturally  arrayed 
against  the  new  movement,  conducted  as  it  was  by  manu- 
facturers and  traders  for  the  benefit,  seemingly,  of  trade 
and  those  whom  it  employed.  The  artisan  population, 
who  might  have  been  formidable  as  a  disturbing  element, 
were,  on  the  whole,  rather  against  the  Free-traders  than 
for  them.  Nearly  all  the  great  official  leaders  had  to  be 
converted  to  the  doctrines  of  Free-trade.  Many  of  the 
Whigs  were  willing  enough  to  admit  the  case  of  Free- 
trade  as  the  young  Scotch  lady  mentioned  by  Sydney 
Smith  admitted  the  case  of  love,  "  in  the  abstract ; "  but 
they  could  not  recognize  the  possibility  of  applying  it  in 
the  complicated  financial  conditions  of  an  artificial  system 
like  ours.  Some  of  the  Whigs  were  in  favor  of  a  fixed 
duty  in  place  of  the  existing  sliding-scale.  The  leaders 
of  the  movement  had,  indeed,  to  resist  a  very  dangerous 
temptation  coming  from  statesmen  who  professed  to  be 
in  accordance  with  them  as  to  the  mere  principle  of 
protection,  but  who  were  always  endeavoring  to  persuade 
them  that  they  had  better  accept  any  decent  compromise, 
and  not  push  their  demands  to  extremes.  The  witty  peer 
who  in  a  former  generation  answered  an  advocate  of 
moderate  reform  by  asking  him  what  he  thought  of 
moderate  chastity,  might  have  had  many  opportunities,  if 
he  had  been  engaged  in  the  Free-trade  movement,  of 
turning  his  epigram  to  account. 

Mr.  Macaulay,  for  instance,  wrote  to  the  electors  of 
Edinburgh  to  remonstrate  with  them  on  what  he  con- 
sidered their  fanatical  and  uncompromising  adherence  to 
the  principle  of  Free-trade.  "In  my  opinion,"  Mr. 
Macaulay  wrote  to  his  constituents,  "  you  are  all  wrong — 


FREE-TRADE  AND  THE  LEAGUE.  295 

not  because  you  think  all  protection  bad,  for  I  think  so 
too ;  not  even  because  you  avow  your  opinion  and  attempt 
to  propagate  it,  for  I  have  always  done  the  same,  and 
shall  do  the  same ;  but  because,  being  in  a  situation 
where  your  only  hope  is  in  a  compromise,  you  refuse  to 
hear  of  compromise ;  because,  being  in  a  situation  where 
every  person  who  will  go  a  step  with  you  on  the  right 
road  ought  to  be  cordially  welcomed,  you  drive  from  you 
those  who  are  willing  and  desirous  to  go  with  you 
half-way.  To  this  policy  I  will  be  no  party.  I  will  not 
abandon  those  with  whom  I  have  hitherto  acted,  and 
without  whose  help  I  am  confident  that  no  great  improve- 
ment can  be  effected,  for  an  object  purely  selfish."  It 
had  not  occurred  to  Mr.  Macaulay  that  any  party  but  the 
"VVhigs  could  bring  in  any  measure  of  fiscal  or  other 
reform  worth  the  having;  and,  indeed,  he  probably 
thought  it  would  be  something  like  an  act  of  ingratitude 
amounting  to  a  species  of  sacrilege  to  accepted  reform 
from  any  hands  but  those  of  its  recognized  Whig  patrons. 
The  Anti-Corn-law  agitation  introduced  a  game  of  politics 
into  England  which  astonished  and  considerably  discom- 
fited steady-going  politicians  like  Macaulay.  The  League 
men  did  not  profess  to  be  bound  by  any  indefeasible  bond 
of  allegiance  to  the  Whig  party.  They  were  prepared  to 
co-operate  with  any  party  whatever  which  would  under- 
take to  abolish  the  Corn-laws.  Their  agitation  would 
have  done  some  good  in  this  way,  if  in  no  other  sense. 
It  introduced  a  more  robust  and  independent  spirit  into 
political  life.  It  is  almost  ludicrous  sometimes  to  read 
the  diatribes  of  supporters  of  Lord  Melbourne's  Govern- 
ment, for  example,  against  any  one  who  should  presume 
to  think  that  any  object  hi  the  mind  of  a  true  patriot,  or 
at  least  of  a  true  Liberal,  could  equal  hi  importance  that 
of  keeping  the  Melbourne  Ministry  hi  power.  Great 
reforms  have  been  made  by  Conservative  governments 


296  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

in  our  own  days,  because  the  new  political  temper  which 
was  growing  up  in  England  refused  to  affirm  that  the 
patent  of  reform  rested  in  the  possession  of  any  particular 
party,  and  that  if  the  holders  of  the  monopoly  did  not 
find  it  convenient,  or  were  not  in  the  humor  to  use  it  any 
further  just  then,  no  one  else  must  venture  to  interfere  in 
the  matter,  or  to  undertake  the  duty  which  they  had 
declined  to  perform.  At  the  time  that  Macaulay  wrote 
his  letter  however,  it  had  not  entered  into  the  mind  of 
any  "Whig  to  believe  it  possible  that  the  repeal  of  the 
Corn-laws  was  to  be  the  work  of  a  great  Conservative 
minister,  done  at  the  bidding  of  two  Radical  politicians. 

It  is  a  significant  fact  that  the  Anti-Corn-law  League 
were  not  in  the  least  discouraged  by  the  accession  of  Sir 
Robert  Peel  to  power.  To  them  the  fixed  duty  proposed 
by  Lord  John  Russell  was  as  objectionable  as  Peel's  slid- 
ing-scale.  Their  hopes  seem  rather  to  have  gone  up  than 
gone  down  when  the  minister  came  into  power  whose 
adherents,  unlike  those  of  Lord  John  Russell,  were  ab- 
solutely against  the  very  principle  of  Free-trade.  It  is  of 
some  importance,  in  estimating  the  morality  of  the  course 
pursued  by  Peel,  to  observe  the  opinion  formed  of  his  pro- 
fessions and  his  probable  purposes  by  the  shrewd  men 
who  led  the  Anti-Corn-law  League.  The  grand  charge 
against  Peel  is  that  he  betrayed  his  party ;  that  he  induced 
them  to  continue  their  allegiance  to  him  on  the  promise 
that  he  would  never  concede  the  principle  of  Free-trade ; 
and  that  he  used  his  power  to  establish  Free-trade  when 
the  time  came  to  choose  between  it  and  a  surrender  of 
office.  Now  it  is  certain  that  the  League  always  regarded 
Sir  Robert  Peel  as  a  Free-trader  in  heart;  as  one  who 
fully  admitted  the  principle  of  Free-trade,  but  who  did 
not  see  his  way  just  then  to  deprive  the  agricultural  in- 
terest of  the  protection  on  which  they  had  for  so  many 
years  been  allowed  and  encouraged  to  lean.  In  the  de- 


FREE-TRADE  AND  THE  LEAGUE.  297 

bate  after  the  general  election  of  1841 — the  debate  which 
turned  out  the  Melbourne  Ministry — Mr.  Cobden,  then  for 
the  first  time  a  member  of  the  House  of  Commons,  said : 
"I  am  a  Free-trader;  I  call  myself  neither  Whig  nor 
Tory.  I  am  proud  to  acknowledge  the  virtue  of  the  Whig 
Ministry  in  coming  out  from  the  ranks  of  the  monopolists 
and  advancing  three  parts  out  of  four  in  my  own  direc- 
tion. Yet  if  the  right  honorable  baronet  opposite  (Sir  R. 
Peel)  advances  one  step  farther,  I  will  be  the  first  to  meet 
him  half-way  and  shake  hands  with  him."  Some  years 
later  Mr.  Cobden  said,  at  Birmingham,  "  There  can  be  no 
doubt  that  Sir  Robert  Peel  is  at  heart  as  good  a  Free- 
trader as  I  am.  He  has  told  us  so  in  the  House  of  Com- 
mons again  and  again ;  nor  do  I  doubt  that  Sir  Robert 
Peel  has  in  his  inmost  heart  the  desire  to  be  the  man  who 
shall  carry  out  the  principles  of  Free-trade  in  this  country." 
Sir  Robert  Peel  had,  indeed,  as  Mr.  Cobden  said,  again  and 
again  in  Parliament  expressed  his  conviction  as  to  the 
general  truth  of  the  principles  of  Free-trade.  In  1842,  he 
declared  it  to  be  utterly  beyond  the  power  of  Parliament, 
and  a  mere  delusion,  to  say  that  by  any  duty,  fixed  or 
otherwise,  a  certain  price  could  be  guaranteed  to  the  pro- 
ducer. In  the  same  year  he  expressed  his  belief  that  "  on 
the  general  principle  of  Free- trade  there  is  now  no  great 
difference  of  opinion,  and  that  all  agree  in  the  general 
rule  that  we  should  buy  in  the  cheapest  and  sell  in  the 
dearest  market."  This  expression  of  opinion  called  forth 
an  ironical  cheer  from  the  benches  of  opposition.  Peel 
knew  well  what  the  cheer  was  meant  to  convey.  He 
knew  it  meant  to  ask  him  why,  then,  he  did  not  allow  the 
country  to  buy  its  grain  in  the  cheapest  market.  He 
promptly  added — "  I  know  the  meaning  of  that  cheer.  I 
do  not  wish  to  raise  a  discussion  on  the  Corn-laws  or  the 
Sugar  Duties,  which  I  contend,  however,  are  exceptions 
to  the  general  rule,  and  I  will  not  go  into  that  question 


298  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

now."  The  press  of  the  day,  whether  for  or  against  Peel, 
commented  upon  his  declarations  and  his  measures  as  in- 
dicating clearly  that  the  bent  of  his  mind  was  toward 
Free-trade  even  in  grain.  At  all  events,  he  had  reached 
that  mental  condition  when  he  regarded  the  case  of  grain, 
like  that  of  sugar,  as  a  necessary  exception,  for  the  time, 
to  the  operation  of  a  general  rule. 

It  ought  to  have  been  obvious  that  if  exceptional  cir- 
cumstances should  arise,  pulling  more  strongly  in  the 
direction  of  the  League,  Sir  Robert  Peel's  own  explicit 
declarations  must  bind  him  to  recognize  the  necessity  of 
applying  the  Free-trade  principles  even  to  corn.  "Sir 
Robert  Peel,"  says  his  cousin,  Sir  Laurence  Peel,  in  a 
sketch  of  the  life  and  character  of  the  great  statesman, 
"had  been,  as  I  have  said,  always  a  Free-trader.  The 
questions  to  which  he  had  declined  to  apply  those  prin- 
ciples had  been  viewed  by  him  as  exceptional.  The  Corn- 
law  had  been  so  treated  by  many  able  exponents  of  the 
principles  of  Free-trade."  Sir  Robert  Peel  himself  has 
left  it  on  record  that  during  the  discussions  on  the  Corn- 
law  of  1842  he  was  more  than  once  pressed  to  give  a 
guarantee,  "  so  far  as  a  minister  could  give  it,"  that  the 
amount  of  protection  established  by  that  law  should  be 
permanently  adhered  to ;  "  but  although  I  did  not  then 
contemplate  the  necessity  for  further  change,  I  uniformly 
refused  to  fetter  the  discretion  of  the  Government  by  any 
such  assurances  as  those  that  were  required  of  me."  It 
is  evident  that  the  condition  of  Sir  Robert  Peel's  opinions 
was,  even  as  far  back  as  1842,  something  very  different 
indeed  from  that  of  the  ordinary  county  member  or 
pledged  Protectionist,  and  that  Peel  had  done  all  he  could 
to  make  this  clear  to  his  party.  A  minister  who,  in  1842, 
refused  to  fetter  the  discretion  of  his  Government  in  deal- 
ing with  the  protection  of  home-grown  grain  ought  not, 
on  the  face  of  things,  to  be  accused  of  violating  his 


FREE-TRADE  AND  THE  LEAGUE.  299 

pledges  and  betraying  his  party,  if,  four  years  later, 
under  the  pressure  of  extraordinary  circumstances,  he 
made  up  his  mind  to  the  abolition  of  such  a  protection. 
Let  us  test  this  in  a  manner  that  will  be  familiar  to  our 
own  time.  Suppose  a  Prime-minister  is  pressed  by  some 
of  his  own  party  to  give  the  House  of  Commons  a  guaran- 
tee, "  so  far  as  a  minister  could  give  it,"  that  the  prin- 
ciple of  the  State  Church  Establishment  in  England  shall 
be  permanently  adhered  to.  He  declines  to  fetter  the 
discretion  of  the  Government  in  the  future.  Is  it  not 
evident  that  such  an  answer  would  be  taken  by  nine  out 
often  of  his  listeners  to  be  ominous  of  some  change  to 
the  Established  Church?  If  four  years  after  the  same 
minister  were  to  propose  to  disestablish  the  Church,  he 
might  be  denounced  and  he  might  even  be  execrated,  but 
no  one  could  fairly  accuse  him  of  Laving  violated  his 
pledge  and  betrayed  his  party. 

The  country  party,  however,  did  not  understand  Sir 
Robert  Peel  as  their  opponents  and  his  assuredly  under- 
stood him.  They  did  not  at  this  time  believe  in  the  pos- 
sibility of  any  change.  Free- trade  was  to  them  little  more 
than  an  abstraction.  They  did  not  much  care  who 
preached  it  out  of  Parliament.  They  were  convinced 
that  the  state  of  things  they  saw  around  them  when  they 
were  boys  would  continue  to  the  end.  They  looked  on 
Mr.  Villiers  and  his  annual  motion  in  favor  of  Free-trade 
very  much  as  a  stout  old  Tory  of  later  times  might  regard 
the  annual  motion  for  woman  suffrage.  Both  parties  in 
the  House — that  is  to  say,  both  of  the  parties  from  whom 
ministers  were  taken — alike  set  themselves  against  the 
introduction  of  any  such  measure.  The  supporters  of  it 
were,  with  one  exception,  not  men  of  family  and  rank.  It 
was  agitated  for  a  good  deal  out-of-doors,  but  agitation 
had  not  up  to  that  time  succeeded  in  making  much  way 
even  with  a  reformed  Parliament.  The  country  party 


300  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

observed  that  some  men  among  the  two  leading  sets 
went  farther  in  favor  of  the  abstract  principle  than 
others :  but  it  did  not  seem  to  them  that  that  really 
affected  the  practical  question  very  much.  In  1842  Mr. 
Disraeli  himself  was  one  of  those  who  stood  up  for  the 
Free-trade  principle,  and  insisted  that  it  had  been  rather 
the  inherited  principle  of  the  Conservatives  than  of  the 
Whigs.  Country  gentlemen  did  not,  therefore,  greatly 
concern  themselves  about  the  practical  work  doing  in 
Manchester,  or  the  professions  of  abstract  opinion  so 
often  made  in  Parliament.  They  did  not  see  that  the 
mind  of  their  leader  was  avowedly  in  a  progressive  con- 
dition on  the  subject  of  Free-trade.  Because  they  could 
not  bring  themselves  to  question  for  a  moment  the  prin- 
ciple of  protection  for  home-grown  grain,  they  made  up 
their  minds  that  it  was  a  principle  as  sacred  with  him. 
Against  that  conviction  no  evidence  could  prevail.  It 
was  with  them  a  point  of  conscience  and  honor ;  it  would 
have  seemed  an  insult  to  their  leader  to  believe  even  his 
own  words,  if  these  seemed  to  say  that  it  was  a  mere 
question  of  expediency,  convenience,  and  time  with  him. 

Perhaps  it  would  have  been  better  if  Sir  Robert  Peel 
had  devoted  himself  more  directly  to  what  Mr.  Disraeli 
afterward  called  educating  his  party.  Perhaps  if  he  had 
made  it  part  of  his  duty  as  a  leader  to  prepare  the  minds 
of  his  followers  for  the  fact  that  protection  for  gram, 
having  ceased  to  be  tenable  as  an  economic  principle, 
would  possibly  some  day  have  to  be  given  up  as  a  practice, 
he  might  have  taken  his  party  along  with  him.  He  might 
have  been  able  to  show  them,  as  the  events  have  shown 
them  since,  that  the  introduction  of  free  corn  would  be  a 
blessing  to  the  population  of  England  in  general,  and 
would  do  nothing  but  good  for  the  landed  interest  as  well. 
The  influence  of  Peel  at  that  time,  and  indeed  all  through 
his  administration  up  to  the  introduction  of  his  Free-trade 


FREE-TRADE  AND  TUE  LEAGUE.  301 

measures,  was  limitless,  so  far  as  his  party  were  con- 
cerned, lie  could  have  done  anything  with  them.  In- 
deed, we  find  no  evidence  so  clear  to  prove  that  Peel  had 
not  in  1842  made  up  his  mind  to  the  introduction  of  Free- 
trade  as  the  fact  that  he  did  not  at  once  begin  to  educate 
his  party  to  it.  This  is  to  be  regretted.  The  measure 
might  have  been  passed  by  common  accord.  There  is 
something  not  altogether  without  pathetic  influence  in 
the  thought  of  that  country  party  whom  Peel  had  led  so 
long,  and  who  adored  him  so  thoroughly,  turning  away 
from  him  and  against  him,  and  mournfully  seeking  another 
leader.  There  is  something  pathetic  in  the  thought  that, 
rightly  or  wrongly,  they  should  have  believed  themselves 
betrayed  by  their  chief.  But  Peel,  to  begin  with,  was 
a  reserved,  cold,  somewhat  awkward  man.  He  was  not 
effusive  ;  he  did  not  pour  out  his  emotions  and  reveal 
all  his  changes  of  opinion  in  bursts  of  confidence  even  to 
his  habitual  associates.  He  brooded  over  these  things  in 
his  own  mind ;  he  gave  such  expression  to  them  in  open 
debate  as  any  passing  occasion  seemed  strictly  to  call  for ; 
and  he  assumed,  perhaps,  that  the  gradual  changes  oper- 
ating in  his  views  when  thus  expressed  were  understood 
by  his  followers.  Above  all,  it  is  probable  that  Peel  him- 
self did  not  see  until  almost  the  last  moment  that  the 
time  had  actually  come  when  the  principle  of  protection 
must  give  way  to  other  and  more  weighty  claims.  In  his 
speech  announcing  his  intended  legislation  in  1846,  Sir 
Robert  Peel,  with  a  proud  frankness  which  was  character- 
istic of  him,  denied  that  his  altered  course  of  action  was 
due  exclusively  to  the  failure  of  the  potato  crop  and  the 
dread  of  famine  in  Ireland.  "  I  will  not,"  he  said  "  with- 
hold the  homage  which  is  due  to  the  progress  of  reason 
and  of  truth  by  denying  that  my  opinions  on  the  subject 
of  Protection  have  undergone  a  change.  ...  I  will  not 
direct  the  course  of  the  vessel  by  observations  taken  in 


302  A  niSTOEY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

1842."  But  it  is  probable  that  if  the  Irish  famine  had  not 
threatened,  the  moment  for  introducing  the  new  legisla- 
tion might  have  been  indefinitely  postponed.  The  pros- 
pects of  the  Anti-Corn-law  League  did  not  look  by  any 
means  bright  when  the  session  preceding  the  introduction 
of  the  Free-trade  legislation  came  to  an  end.  The  number 
of  votes  that  the  League  could  count  on  in  Parliament  did 
not  much  exceed  that  which  the  advocates  of  Home  Rule 
have  been  able  to  reckon  up  in  our  day.  Nothing  in  1843 
or  in  the  earlier  part  of  1845  pointed  to  any  immediate 
necessity  for  Sir  Robert  Peel's  testing  the  progress  of  his 
own  convictions  by  reducing  them  into  the  shape  of  prac- 
tical action.  It  is,  therefore,  not  hard  to  understand  how 
even  a  far-seeing  and  conscientious  statesman,  busy  with 
the  practical  work  of  each  day,  might  have  put  off  taking 
definite  counsel  with  himself  as  to  the  introduction  of 
measures  for  which  just  then  there  seemed  no  special 
necessity,  and  which  could  hardly  be  introduced  without 
bitter  controversy. 


FAMINE  FORCES  PEEKS  HAND.  303 


CHAPTER  XV. 

FAMINE  FORCES  PEEL'S  HAND. 

WE  see  how  the  two  great  parties  of  the  state  stood 
with  regard  to  this  question  of  Free-trade.  The  Whigs 
were  steadily  gravitating  toward  it.  Their  leaders  did 
not  quite  see  their  way  to  accept  it  as  a  principle  of  prac- 
tical statesmanship,  but  it  was  evident  that  their  accept- 
ance of  it  was  only  a  question  of  time,  and  of  no  long 
time.  The  leader  of  the  Tory  party  was  heing  drawn  day 
by  day  more  in  the  same  direction.  Both  leaders,  Russell 
and  Peel,  had  gone  so  far  as  to  admit  the  general  principle 
of  Free-trade.  Peel  had  contended  that  grain  was,  in 
England,  a  necessary  exception  ;  Russell  was  not  of 
opinion  that  the  time  had  come  when  it  could  be  treated 
otherwise  than  as  an  exception.  The  Free-trade  party, 
small,  indeed,  in  its  Parliamentary  force,  but  daily  grow- 
ing more  and  more  powerful  with  the  country,  would  take 
nothing  from  either  leader  but  Free-trade  sans  phrase ; 
and  would  take  that  from  either  leader  without  regard  to 
partisan  considerations.  It  is  evident  to  any  one  who 
knows  anything  of  the  working  of  our  system  of  govern- 
ment by  party,  that  this  must  soon  have  ended  in  one  or 
other  of  the  two  great  ruling  parties  forming  an  alliance 
with  the  Free-traders.  If  unforeseen  events  had  not  inter- 
posed, it  is  probable  that  conviction  would  first  have 
fastened  on  the  minds  of  the  Whigs,  and  that  they  would 
have  had  the  honor  of  abolishing  the  Corn-laws.  They 


304  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

were  out  of  office,  and  did  not  seem  likely  to  get  back 
soon  to  it  by  their  own  power,  and  the  Free-trade  party 
would  have  come  in  time  to  be  a  very  desirable  ally.  It 
would  be  idle  to  pretend  to  doubt  that  the  convictions  of 
political  parties  are  hastened  on  a  good  deal  under  our 
system  by  the  yearning  of  those  who  are  out  of  office  to 
get  the  better  of  those  who  are  in.  Statesmen  in  England 
are  converted  as  Henry  of  Navarre  became  Catholic :  we 
do  not  say  that  they  actually  change  their  opinions  for 
the  sake  of  making  themselves  eligible  for  power,  but  a 
change  which  has  been  growing  up  imperceptibly,  and 
which  might  otherwise  have  taken  a  long  time  to  declare 
itself,  is  stimulated  thus  to  confess  itself  and  come  out 
into  the  light.  But  in  the  case  of  the  Anti-Corn-law  agi- 
tation, an  event  over  which  political  parties  had  no  control 
intervened  to  spur  the  intent  of  the  Prime-minister.  Mr. 
Bright,  many  years  after,  when  pronouncing  the  eulogy 
of  his  dead  friend  Cobden,  described  what  happened  in  a 
fine  sentence  :  "  Famine  itself,  against  which  we  had 
warred,  joined  us."  In  the  autumn  of  1845  the  potato  rot 
began  in  Ireland. 

The  vast  majority  of  the  working  population  of  Ireland 
were  known  to  depend  absolutely  on  the  potato  for  subsist- 
ence. In  the  northern  province,  where  the  population 
were  of  Scotch  extraction,  the  oatmeal,  the  brose  of  their 
ancestors,  still  supplied  the  staple  of  their  food;  but  in  the 
southern  and  western  provinces  a  large  proportion  of  the 
peasantry  actually  lived  on  the  potato,  and  the  potato 
alone.  In  these  districts  whole  generations  grew  up,  lived, 
married,  and  passed  away,  without  having  ever  tasted 
flesh  meat.  It  was  evident,  then,  that  a  failure  in  the 
potato  crop  would  be  equivalent  to  famine.  Many  of  the 
laboring  class  received  little  or  no  money  wages.  They 
lived  on  what  was  called  the  "  cottier  tenant  system ;  " 
that  is  to  say,  a  man  worked  for  a  land-owner  on  condition 


FAMINE  FORCES  PEEL'S  HAND.  305 

of  getting  the  use  of  a  little  scrap  of  land  for  himself,  on 
which  to  grow  potatoes  to  be  the  sole  food  of  himself  and 
his  family.  The  news  came,  in  the  autumn  of  1845,  that 
the  long  continuance  of  sunless  wet  and  cold  had  im- 
perilled, if  not  already  destroyed,  the  food  of  a  people. 

The  cabinet  of  Sir  Robert  Peel  held  hasty  meetings 
closely  following  each  other.  People  began  to  ask 
whether  Parliament  was  about  to  be  called  together,  and 
whether  the  Government  had  resolved  on  a  bold  policy. 
The  Anti-Corn-law  League  were  clamoring  for  the  opening 
of  the  ports.  The  Prime-minister  himself  was  strongly 
in  favor  of  such  a  course.  He  urged  upon  his  colleagues 
that  all  restrictions  upon  the  importation  of  foreign  corn 
should  be  suspended  either  by  an  Order  in  Council,  or  by 
calling  Parliament  together  and  recommending  such  a 
measure  from  the  throne.  It  is  now  known  that  in  offer- 
ing this  advice  to  his  colleagues  Peel  accompanied  it  with 
the  expression  of  a  doubt  as  to  whether  it  would  ever  be 
possible  to  restore  the  restrictions  that  had  once  been 
suspended.  Indeed,  this  doubt  must  have  filled  every 
mind.  The  League  were  openly  declaring  that  one  reason 
why  they  called  for  the  opening  of  the  ports  was  that, 
once  opened,  they  never  could  be  closed  again.  The  doubt 
was  enough  for  some  of  the  colleagues  of  Sir  Robert  Peel. 
It  seems  marvellous  now  how  responsible  statesmen  could 
struggle  for  the  retention  of  restrictions  which  were  so 
unpopular  and  indefensible  that  if  they  were  once  sus- 
pended, under  the  pressure  of  no  matter  what  exceptional 
necessity,  they  never  could  be  reimposed.  The  Duke  of 
Wellington  and  Lord  Stanley,  however,  opposed  the  idea 
of  opening  the  ports,  and  the  proposal  fell  through.  The 
Cabinet  merely  resolved  on  appointing  a  commission,  con- 
sisting of  the  heads  of  departments  in  Ireland,  to  take 
some  steps  to  guard  against  a  sudden  outbreak  of  famine, 
and  the  thought  of  an  autumnal  session  was  abandoned. 

20 


806  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

Sir  Robert  Peel  himself  has  thus  tersely  described  the 
manner  in  which  his  proposals  were  received:  "The 
cabinet  by  a  very  considerable  majority  declined  giving 
its  assent  to  the  proposals  which  I  thus  made  to  them. 
They  were  supported  by  only  three  members  of  the  cabinet 
— the  Earl  of  Aberdeen,  Sir  James  Graham,  and  Mr. 
Sidney  Herbert.  The  other  members  of  the  cabinet,  some 
on  the  ground  of  objection  to  the  principle  of  the  measures 
recommended,  others  upon  the  ground  that  there  was  not 
yet  sufficient  evidence  of  the  necessity  for  them,  withheld 
their  sanction." 

The  great  cry  all  through  Ireland  was  for  the  opening 
of  the  ports.  The  Mansion  House  Relief  Committee  of 
Dublin  issued  a  series  of  resolutions  declaring  their  con- 
viction, from  the  most  undeniable  evidence,  that  consider- 
ably more  than  one-third  of  the  entire  potato  crop  in  Ire- 
land had  been  already  destroyed  by  the  disease,  and  that 
the  disease  had  not  ceased  its  ravages,  but  on  the  contrary 
was  daily  expanding  more  and  more.  "Xo  reasonable 
conjecture  can  be  formed,"  the  resolutions  went  on  to 
state,  "  with  respect  to  the  limit  of  its  effects  short  of  the 
destruction  of  the  entire  remaining  crop ; "  and  the  docu- 
ment concluded  with  a  denunciation  of  the  ministry  for 
not  opening  the  ports  or  calling  Parliament  together  before 
the  usual  time  for  its  assembling. 

Two  or  three  days  after  the  issue  of  these  resolutions 
Lord  John  Russell  wrote  a  letter  from  Edinburgh  to  his 
constituents,  the  electors  of  the  City  of  London — a  letter 
which  is  one  of  the  historical  documents  of  the  reign.  It 
announced  his  unqualified  conversion  to  the  principles  of 
the  Anti-Corn-law  League.  The  failure  of  the  potato  crop 
was,  of  course,  the  immediate  occasion  of  this  letter. 
"  Indecision  and  procrastination,"  Lord  John  Russell  wrote, 
"  may  produce  a  state  of  suffering  which  it  is  frightful  to 
contemplate It  is  no  longer  worth  while  to  con- 


FAMINE  FORCES  PEEL'S  HAND.  307 

tend  for  a  fixed  duty.  In  1841  the  Free-trade  party  would 
have  agreed  to  a  duty  of  85.  per  quarter  on  wheat,  and  after 
a  lapse  of  years  this  duty  might  have  been  further  re- 
duced, and  ultimately  abolished.  But  the  imposition  of 
any  duty  at  present,  without  a  provision  for  its  extinction 
within  a  short  period,  would  but  prolong  a  contest  already 
sufficiently  fruitful  of  animosity  and  discontent."  Lord 
John  Russell  then  invited  a  general  understanding,  to  put 
an  end  to  a  system  "  which  has  been  proved  to  be  the  blight 
of  commerce,  the  bane  of  agriculture,  the  source  of  bitter 
division  among  classes,  the  cause  of  penury,  fever,  mor- 
tality, and  crime  among  the  people."  Then  the  writer 
added  a  significant  remark  to  the  effect  that  the  Govern- 
ment appeared  to  be  waiting  for  some  excuse  to  give  up 
the  present  Corn-law,  and  urging  the  people  to  afford 
them  all  the  excuse  they  could  desire,  "  by  petition,  by 
address,  by  remonstrance." 

Peel  himself  has  told  us  in  his  Memoirs  what  was  the 
effect  which  this  letter  produced  upon  his  own  councils. 
It  "  could  not,"  he  points  out,  "  fail  to  exercise  a  very 
material  influence  on  the  public  mind,  and  on  the  subject- 
matter  of  our  deliberations  in  the  cabinet.  It  justified 
the  conclusion  that  the  Whig  party  was  prepared  to  unite 
with  the  Anti-Corn-law  League  in  demanding  the  total  re- 
peal of  the  Corn-laws."  Peel  would  not  consent  now  to 
propose  simply  an  opening  of  the  ports.  It  would  seem, 
he  thought,  a  mere  submission,  to  accept  the  minimum  of 
the  terms  ordered  by  the  Whig  leader.  That  would  have 
been  well  enough  when  he  first  recommended  it  to  his 
cabinet;  and  if  it  could  then  have  been  offered  to  the 
country  as  the  spontaneous  movement  of  a  united  ministry, 
it  would  have  been  becoming  of  the  emergency  and  of  the 
men.  But  to  do  this  now  would  be  futile ;  would  seem 
like  trifling  with  the  question.  Sir  Robert  Peel,  therefore^ 
recommended  to  his  cabinet  an  early  meeting  of  Parlia- 


308  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

ment  with  the  view  of  bringing  forward  some  measure 
equivalent  to  a  speedy  repeal  of  the  Corn-laws. 

The  recommendation  was  wise :  it  was,  indeed,  indispen- 
sable. Yet  it  is  hard  to  think  that  an  impartial  posterity 
will  form  a  very  lofty  estimate  of  the  wisdom  with  which 
the  counsels  of  the  two  great  English  parties  were  guided 
in  this  momentous  emergency.  Neither  Whigs  nor  Tories 
appear  to  have  formed  a  judgment  because  of  facts  or  prin- 
ciples, but  only  in  deference  to  the  political  necessities  of 
the  hour.  Sir  Robert  Peel  himself  denied  that  it  was  the 
resistless  hand  of  famine  in  Ireland  which  had  brought  him 
to  his  resolve  that  the  Corn-laws  ought  to  be  abolished.  He 
grew  into  the  conviction  that  they  were  bad  in  principle. 
Lord  John  Russell  had  long  been  growing  into  the  same 
conviction.  Yet  the  League  had  been  left  to  divide  with 
but  small  numbers  against  overwhelming  majorities  made 
up  of  both  parties,  until  the  very  session  before  Peel  pro- 
posed to  repeal  the  Corn-laws.  Lord  Beaconsfleld,  indeed, 
indulges  in  something  like  exaggeration  when  he  says,  hi 
his  "  Life  of  Lord  George  Bentinck,"  that  the  close  of  the 
session  of  1845  found  the  League  nearly  reduced  to  silence. 
But  it  is  not  untrue  that,  as  he  says,  "  the  Manchester  con- 
federates seemed  to  be  least  in  favor  with  Parliament  and 
the  country  on  the  very  eve  of  their  triumph."  "  They 
lost  at  the  same  time  elections  and  the  ear  of  the  House ; 
and  the  cause  of  total  and  immediate  repeal  seemed  in  a 
not  less  hopeless  position  than  when,  under  circumstances 
of  infinite  difficulty,  it  was  first  and  solely  upheld  by  the 
terse  eloquence  and  vivid  perception  of  Charles  Villiers." 
Lord  Beaconsfield  certainly  ought  to  know  what  cause 
had  and  what  had  not  the  ear  of  the  House  of  Commons 
at  that  time ;  and  yet  we  venture  to  doubt,  even  after  his 
assurance,  whether  the  League  and  its  speakers  had  in 
any  way  found  their  hold  on  the  attention  of  Parliament 
diminishing.  But  the  loss  of  elections  is  beyond  dispute. 


FAMINE  FORCES  PEEL1 8  HAND.  309 

It  is  a  fact  alluded  to  in  the  very  letter  from  Lord  John 
Russell  which  was  creating  so  much  commotion.  "  It  is 
not  to  be  denied,"  Lord  John  Russell  writes,  "  that  many 
elections  for  cities  and  towns  in  1841,  and  some  in  1845, 
appear  to  favor  the  assertion  that  Free-trade  is  not  popular 
with  the  great  mass  of  the  community."  This  is,  from 
whatever  cause,  a  very  common  phenomenon  in  our  polit- 
ical history.  A  movement  which  began  with  the  promise 
of  sweeping  all  before  it  seems  after  awhile  to  lose  its 
force,  and  is  supposed  by  many  observers  to  be  now  only 
the  work  and  the  care  of  a  few  earnest  and  fanatical  men. 
Suddenly  it  is  taken  up  by  a  minister  of  commanding  in- 
fluence, and  the  bore  or  the  crotchet  of  one  Parliament  is 
the  great  party  controversy  of  a  second,  and  the  accom- 
plished triumph  of  a  third.  In  this  instance  it  is  beyond 
dispute  that  the  League  seemed  to  be  somewhat  losing  in 
strength  and  influence  just  on  the  eve  of  its  complete 
triumph.  He  must,  indeed,  be  the  very  optimist  of  Par- 
liamentary government  who  upholds  the  manner  of  Free- 
trade's  final  adoption  as  absolutely  satisfactory,  and  as 
reflecting  nothing  but  credit  upon  the  counsels  of  our  two 
great  political  parties.  Such  a  well-contented  personage 
might  be  fairly  asked  to  explain  why  a  system  of  protec- 
tive taxation,  beginning  to  be  regarded  by  all  thoughtful 
statesmen  as  bad  in  itself,  should  never  be  examined  with 
a  view  to  its  repeal  until  the  force  of  a  great  emergency 
and  the  rival  biddings  of  party  leaders  came  to  render  its 
repeal  inevitable.  The  Corn-laws,  as  all  the  world  now 
admits,  were  a  cruel  burden  to  the  poor  and  the  working- 
class  of  England.  They  were  justly  described  by  Lord 
John  Russell  as  "  the  blight  of  commerce,  the  bane  of 
agriculture,  the  source  of  bitter  division  among  classes ; 
the  cause  of  penury,  fever,  mortality,  and  crime  among 
the  people."  All  this  was  independent  of  the  sudden  and 
ephemeral  calamity  of  the  potato  rot,  which  at  the  time 


310  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

when  Lord  John  Russell  wrote  that  letter  did  not  threaten 
to  become  nearly  so  fatal  as  it  is  afterward  proved  to  be. 
One  cannot  help  asking  how  long  would  the  Corn-laws 
have  been  suffered  thus  to  blight  commerce  and  agri- 
culture, to  cause  division  among  classes,  and  to  produce 
penury,  mortality,  and  crime  among  the  people,  if  the 
potato  rot  in  Ireland  had  not  rendered  it  necessary  to 
do  something  without  delay  ? 

The  potato  rot,  however,  inspired  the  writing  of 
Lord  John  Russell's  letter ;  and  Lord  John  Russell's 
letter  inspired  Sir  Robert  Peel  with  the  conviction  that 
something  must  be  done.  Most  of  his  colleagues  were 
inclined  to  go  with  him  this  time.  A  cabinet  council 
was  held  on  November  25th,  almost  immediately  after 
the  publication  of  Lord  John  Russell's  letter.  At  that 
council  Sir  Robert  Peel  recommended  the  summoning 
of  Parliament  with  a  view  to  instant  measures  to  combat 
the  famine  in  Ireland,  but  with  a  view  also  to  some 
announcement  of  legislation  intended  to  pave  the  way 
for  the  repeal  of  the  Corn-laws.  Lord  Stanley  still  hesi- 
tated, and  asked  time  to  consider  his  decision.  The  Duke 
of  Wellington  was  unchanged  in  his  private  opinion  that 
the  Corn-laws  ought  to  be  maintained ;  but  he  declared 
with  a  blunt  simplicity  that  his  only  object  in  public  life 
was  "  to  support  Sir  Robert  Peel's  administration  of  the 
Government  for  the  Queen."  "  A  good  government  for 
the  country, "  said  the  sturdy  and  simple  old  hero,  "  is 
more  important  than  Corn-laws  or  any  other  considera- 
tion. "  One  may  smile  at  this  notion  of  a  good  Govern- 
ment without  reference  to  the  quality  of  the  legislation  it 
introduces  ;  it  reminds  one  a  little  of  the  celebrated  study 
of  history  without  reference  to  time  or  place.  But  the 
Duke  acted  strictly  up  to  his  principles  of  duty,  and  he 
declared  that  if  Sir  Robert  Peel  considered  the  repeal  of 
the  Corn-laws  to  bejiot  right  or  necessary  for  the  welfare 


FAMINE  FORCES  PEEL'S  HAND.  311 

of  England,  but  requisite  for  the  maintenance  of  Sir  Robert 
Peel's  position  "  in  Parliament  and  in  the  public  view," 
he  should  thoroughly  support  the  proposal.  Lord  Stanley, 
however,  was  not  to  be  changed  in  the  end.  He  took  time 
to  consider,  and  seems  really  to  have  tried  his  best  to  per- 
suade himself  that  he  could  fall  in  with  the  new  position 
which  the  Premier  had  assumed.  Meanwhile  the  most 
excited  condition  of  public  feeling  prevailed  throughout 
London  and  the  country  generally.  The  Times  news- 
paper came  out  on  December  4th  with  the  announcement 
that  the  ministry  had  made  up  its  mind,  and  that  the 
Royal  speech  at  the  commencement  of  the  session  would 
recommend  an  immediate  consideration  of  the  Corn-laws 
preparatory  to  their  total  repeal.  It  would  be  hardly 
possible  to  exaggerate  the  excitement  caused  by  this 
startling  piece  of  news.  It  was  indignantly  and  in  un- 
qualified terms  declared  a  falsehood  by  the  ministerial 
prints.  Long  arguments  were  gone  into  to  prove  that 
even  if  the  fact  announced  were  true,  it  could  not  possibly 
have  been  known  to  the  Times.  In  Disraeli's  "  Coningsby  " 
Mr.  Rigby  gives  the  clearest  and  most  convincing  reasons 
to  prove,  first,  that  Lord  Spencer  could  not  be  dead,  as 
report  said  he  was ;  and  next,  that  even  if  he  were  dead, 
the  fact  could  not  possibly  be  known  to  those  who  took  on 
themselves  to  announce  it.  He  is  hardly  silenced  even  by 
the  assurance  of  a  great  duke  that  he  is  one  of  Lord 
Spencer's  executors,  and  that  Lord  Spencer  is  certainly 
dead.  So  the  announcement  in  the  Times  was  fiercely 
and  pedantically  argued  against.  "It  can't  be  true;" 
"  the  Times  could  not  get  to  know  of  it ; "  "  it  must  be  a 
cabinet  secret  if  it  were  true ; "  "  nobody  outside  the  cab- 
inet could  possibly  know  of  it ; "  "  if  any  one  outside  the 
cabinet  could  get  to  know  of  it,  it  would  not  be  the  Times  ;  " 
it  would  be  this,  that,  or  the  other  person  or  journal ;  and 
so  forth.  Long  after  it  had  been  made  certain,  beyond 


312  A  IIISTORr  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

even  Mr.  Rigby's  power  of  disputation,  that  the  announce- 
ment was  true  so  far  as  the  resolve  of  the  Prime-minister 
was  concerned,  people  continued  to  argue  and  controvert 
as  to  the  manner  in  which  the  Times  became  possessed  of 
the  secret.  The  general  conclusion  come  to  among  the 
knowing  was  that  the  blandishments  of  a  gifted  and 
beautiful  lady  with  a  dash  of  political  intrigue  in  her  had 
somehow  extorted  the  secret  from  a  young  and  handsome 
member  of  the  cabinet,  and  that  she  had  communicated 
it  to  the  Times.  It  is  not  impossible  that  this  may  have 
been  the  true  explanation.  It  was  believed  in  by  a  great 
many  persons  who  might  have  been  in  a  position  to  judge 
of  the  probabilities.  On  the  other  hand,  there  was  surely 
signs  and  tokens  enough  by  which  a  shrewd  politician 
might  have  guessed  what  was  to  come  without  any  in- 
tervention of  petticoat  diplomacy.  It  seems  odd  now  that 
people  should  then  have  distressed  themselves  so  much 
by  conjectures  as  to  the  source  of  the  information  when 
once  it  was  made  certain  that  the  information  itself  was 
substantially  true.  This  it  undoubtedly  was,  although  it 
did  not  tell  all  the  truth,  and  could  not  foretell.  For 
there  was  an  ordeal  yet  to  be  gone  through  before  the 
Prime-minister  could  put  his  plans  into  operation.  On 
December  4th  the  Times  made  the  announcement.  On 
the  6th,  having  been  passionately  contradicted,  it  re- 
peated the  assertion.  "  We  adhere  to  our  original  an- 
nouncement that  Parliament  will  meet  early  in  January, 
and  that  a  repeal  of  the  Corn-laws  will  be  proposed  in 
one  House  by  Sir  R.  Peel,  and  in  the  other  by  the  Duke 
of  Wellington."  But,  in  the  meantime,  the  opposition  in 
the  cabinet  had  proved  itself  unmanageable.  Lord  Stan- 
ley and  the  Duke  of  Buccleuch  intimated  to  the  Prime- 
minister  that  they  could  not  be  parties  to  any  measure 
involving  the  ultimate  repeal  of  the  Corn-laws.  Sir  Robert 
Peel  did  not  believe  that  he  could  carry  out  his  project 


FAMINE  FORCES  PEEL1  S  HAND.  313 

satisfactorily  under  such  circumstances,  and  he  therefore 
hastened  to  tender  his  resignation  to  the  Queen.  "  The 
other  members  of  the  cabinet,  without  exception,  I  believe  " 
— these  are  Sir  Robert  Peel's  own  words — "  concurred  in 
this  opinion ;  and  under  these  circumstances  I  consider 
it  to  be  my  duty  to  tender  my  resignation  to  her  Majesty. 
On  the  5th  of  December  I  repaired  to  Osborne,  Isle  of 
Wight,  and  humbly  solicited  her  Majesty  to  relieve  me 
from  duties  which  I  felt  I  could  no  longer  discharge  with 
advantage  to  her  Majesty's  service."  The  very  day  after 
the  Times  made  its  famous  announcement,  the  very  day 
before  the  Times  repeated  it,  the  Prime-minister  who  was 
to  propose  the  repeal  of  the  Corn-laws  went  out  of  office. 
Quern  dixere  chaos  !  Apparently  chaos  had  come  again. 
Lord  John  Russell  was  sent  for  from  Edinburgh.  His 
letter  had,  without  any  such  purpose  on  his  part,  written 
him  up  as  the  man  to  take  Sir  Robert  Peel's  place.  Lord 
John  Russell  came  to  London,  and  did  his  best  to  cope 
with  the  many  difficulties  of  the  situation.  His  party 
were  not  very  strong  in  the  country,  and  they  had  not  a 
majority  in  the  House  of  Commons.  He  very  naturally 
endeavored  to  obtain  from  Peel  a  pledge  that  he  would 
support  the  immediate  and  complete  repeal  of  the  Corn- 
laws.  Peel,  writing  to  the  Queen,  "  humbly  expresses  his 
regret  that  he  does  not  feel  it  to  be  consistent  with  his 
duty  to  enter  upon  the  consideration  of  this  important 
question  in  Parliament  fettered  by  a  previous  engagement 
of  the  nature  of  that  required  of  him."  The  position  of 
Lord  John  Russell  was  awkward.  He  had  been  forced 
into  it  because  one  or  two  of  Sir  Robert  Peel's  colleagues 
would  not  consent  to  adopt  the  policy  of  their  chief. 
But  the  very  fact  of  so  stubborn  an  opposition  from  a  man 
of  Lord  Stanley's  influence  showed  clearly  enough  that  the 
passing  of  Free-trade  measures  was  not  to  be  effected 
without  stern  resistance  from  the  country  party.  The 


814  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

whole  risk  and  burden  had  seemingly  been  thrown  en 
Lord  John  Russell ;  and  now  Sir  Robert  Peel  would  not 
even  pledge  himself  to  unconditional  support  of  the  very 
policy  which  was  understood  to  be  his  own.  Lord  John 
Russell  showed,  even  then,  his  characteristic  courage. 
lie  resolved  to  form  a  ministry  without  a  Parliamentary 
majority.  He  was  not,  however,  fated  to  try  the  ordeal. 
Lord  Grey,  who  was  a  few  months  before  Lord  Howick, 
and  who  had  just  succeeded  to  the  title  of  his  father  (the 
stately  Charles  Earl  Grey,  the  pupil  of  Fox,  and  chief  of 
the  cabinet  which  passed  the  Reform  Bill  and  abolished 
slavery) — Lord  Grey  felt  a  strong  objection  to  the  foreign 
policy  of  Lord  Palmerston,  and  these  two  could  not  get 
on  in  one  ministry,  as  it  was  part  of  Lord  John  Russell's 
plan  that  they  should  do.  Lord  Grey  also  was  strongly 
of  opinion  that  a  seat  in  the  cabinet  ought  to  be  offered 
to  Mr.  Cobden ;  but  other  great  Whigs  could  not  bring 
themselves  to  any  larger  sacrifice  to  justice  and  common- 
sense  than  a  suggestion  that  the  office  of  Vice-president 
of  the  Board  of  Trade  should  be  tendered  to  the  leader 
of  the  Free-trade  movement.  Mr.  Macaulay  describes  the 
events  hi  a  letter  to  the  Edinburgh  Chamber  of  Commerce. 
"  All  our  plans  were  frustrated  by  Lord  Grey,  who  ob- 
jected to  Lord  Palmerston  being  Foreign  Secretary.  I 
hope  that  the  public  interests  will  not  suffer.  Sir  Robert 
Peel  must  now  undertake  the  settlement  of  the  question. 
It  is  certain  that  he  can  settle  it.  It  is  by  no  means  cer- 
tain that  we  could  have  done  so.  For  we  shall  to  a  man 
support  him ;  and  a  large  proportion  of  those  who  are 
now  in  office  would  have  refused  to  support  us."  One 
passage  in  Macaulay's  letter  will  be  read  with  peculiar  in- 
terest. "  From  the  first,"  he  says,  "  I  told  Lord  John 
Russell  that  I  stipulated  for  one  thing  only — total  and 
immediate  repeal  of  the  Corn-laws  ;  that  my  objections  to 
gradual  abolition  were  insurmountable ;  but  that  if  he  de- 


FAMINE  FORCES  PEEL1 8  HAND.  315 

clared  for  total  and  immediate  repeal  I  would  be  as  to  all 
other  matters  absolutely  in  his  hands  ;  that  I  would  take 
any  office,  or  no  office,  just  as  suited  him  best ;  and  that 
he  should  never  be  disturbed  by  any  personal  pretensions 
or  jealousies  on  my  part."  No  one  can  doubt  Macaulay's 
sincerity  and  singleness  of  purpose.  But  it  is  surprising 
to  note  the  change  that  the  agitation  of  little  more  than 
two  years  has  made  in  his  opinions  on  the  subject  of 
a  policy  of  immediate  and  unconditional  abolition.  In 
February,  1843,  he  was  pointing  out  to  the  electors  of 
Edinburgh  the  unwisdom  of  refusing  a  compromise,  and 
in  December,  1845,  he  is  writing  to  Edinburgh  to  say  that 
the  one  only  thing  for  which  he  must  stipulate  was 
total  and  immediate  repeal.  The  Anti-Corn-law  League 
might  well  be  satisfied  with  the  propagandist  work  they 
had  done.  The  League  itself  looked  on  very  composedly 
during  these  little  altercations  and  embarrassments  of 
parties.  They  knew  well  enough  now  that  let  who  would 
take  power,  he  must  carry  out  their  policy.  At  a  meet- 
ing of  the  League,  which  was  held  in  Covent  Garden 
Theatre  on  the  17th  of  this  memorable  month,  and  while 
the  negotiations  were  still  going  on,  Mr.  Cobden  declared 
that  he  and  his  friends  had  not  striven  to  keep  one  party 
in  or  another  out  of  office.  "  We  have  worked  with  but 
one  principle  and  one  object  in  view ;  and  if  we  maintain 
that  principle  for  but  six  months  more,  we  shall  attain  to 
that  state  which  I  have  so  long  and  so  anxiously  desired, 
when  the  League  shall  be  dissolved  into  its  primitive 
elements  by  the  triumph  of  its  principles." 

Lord  John  Russell  found  it  impossible  to  form  a  min- 
istry. He  signified  his  failure  to  the  Queen.  Probably, 
having  done  the  best  he  could,  he  was  not  particularly 
distressed  to  find  that  his  efforts  were  ineffectual.  The 
Queen  had  to  send  for  Sir  Robert  Peel  to  Windsor,  and 
tell  him  that  she  must  require  him  to  withdraw  his  resig- 


316  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

nation  and  to  remain  in  her  service.  Sir  Robert  of  course 
could  only  comply.  The  Queen  offered  to  give  him  some 
time  to  enter  into  communication  with  his  colleagues, 
but  Sir  Robert  very  wisely  thought  that  he  could  speak 
with  much  greater  authority  if  he  were  to  invite  them  to 
support  him  in  an  effort  on  which  he  was  determined, 
and  which  he  had  positively  undertaken  to  make.  He, 
therefore,  returned  from  Windsor  on  the  evening  of  De- 
cember 20th,  "  having  resumed  all  the  functions  of  First 
Minister  of  the  Crown."  The  Duke  of  Buccleuch  with- 
drew his  opposition  to  the  policy  which  Peel  was  now 
to  carry  out ;  but  Lord  Stanley  remained  firm.  The  place 
of  the  latter  was  taken  as  Secretary  of  State  for  the  Colo- 
nies by  Mr.  Gladstone,  who,  however,  curiously  enough, 
remained  without  a  seat  in  Parliament  during  the  eventful 
session  that  was  now  to  come.  Mr.  Gladstone  had  sat 
for  the  borough  of  Newark,  but  that  borough  being  under 
the  influence  of  the  Duke  of  Newcastle,  who  had  with- 
drawn his  support  from  the  ministry,  he  did  not  invite 
re-election,  but  remained  without  a  seat  hi  the  House  of 
Commons  for  some  months.  Sir  Robert  Peel  then,  to  use 
his  own  words  in  a  letter  to  the  Princess  de  Lieven,  re- 
sumed power  "  with  greater  means  of  rendering  public 
service  than  I  should  have  had  if  I  had  not  relinquished 
it."  He  felt,  he  said,  "  like  a  man  restored  to  life  after 
his  funeral  service  had  been  preached." 

Parliament  was  summoned  to  meet  in  January.  In  the 
meantime  it  was  easily  seen  how  the  Protectionists  and 
the  Tories  of  the  extreme  order  generally  would  regard 
the  proposals  of  Sir  Robert  Peel.  Protectionist  meetings 
were  held  in  various  parts  of  the  country,  and  they  were 
all  but  unanimous  in  condemning  by  anticipation  the 
policy  of  the  restored  Premier.  Resolutions  were  passed 
at  many  of  these  meetings  expressing  an  equal  disbelief 
in  the  Prime-minister  and  hi  the  famine.  The  utmost 


FAMINE  FORCES  PEEL?  8  HAND.  317 

indignation  was  expressed  at  the  idea  of  there  being  any 
famine  in  prospect  which  could  cause  any  departure  from 
the  principles  which  secured  to  the  farmers  a  certain  fixed 
price  for  their  grain,  or  at  least  prevented  the  price  from 
falling  below  what  they  considered  a  paying  amount.  Not 
less  absurd  than  the  protestations  that  there  would  be  no 
famine  were  some  of  the  remedies  which  were  suggested 
for  it  if  it  should  insist  on  coming  in.  The  Duke  of  Nor- 
folk of  that  time  made  himself  particularly  conspicuous 
by  a  beneficent  suggestion  which  he  offered  to  a  distressed 
population.  He  went  about  recommending  a  curry  powder 
of  his  own  device  as  a  charm  against  hunger. 

Parliament  met.  The  opening  day  was  January  22d, 
1846.  The  Queen  in  person  opened  the  session,  and  the 
speech  from  the  throne  said  a  good  deal  about  the  condi- 
tion of  Ireland  and  the  failure  of  the  potato  crop.  The 
speech  contained  one  significant  sentence.  "  I  have  had," 
her  Majesty  was  made  to  say,  "  great  satisfaction  in  giv- 
ing my  assent  to  the  measures  which  you  have  presented 
to  me  from  time  to  time,  calculated  to  extend  commerce 
and  to  stimulate  domestic  skill  and  industry,  by  the  repeal 
of  prohibitive  and  the  relaxation  of  protective  duties.  I 
recommend  you  to  take  into  your  early  consideration 
whether  the  principle  on  which  you  have  acted  may  not 
with  advantage  be  yet  more  extensively  applied."  Before 
the  address  in  reply  to  the  speech  from  the  throne  was 
moved,  Sir  Robert  Peel  gave  notice  of  the  intention  of  the 
Government  on  the  earliest  possible  day  to  submit  to  the 
consideration  of  the  House  measures  connected  with  the 
commercial  and  financial  affairs  of  the  country. 

There  are  few  scenes  more  animated  and  exciting  than 
that  presented  by  the  House  of  Commons  on  some  night 
when  a  great  debate  is  expected,  or  when  some  moment- 
ous announcement  is  to  be  made.  A  common  thrill  seems 
to  tremble  all  through  the  assembly,  as  a  breath  of  wind 


318  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

runs  across  the  sea.  The  House  appears  for  the  moment 
to  be  one  body,  pervaded  by  one  expectation.  The  minis- 
terial benches,  the  front  benches  of  opposition,  are  oc- 
cupied by  the  men  of  political  renown  and  of  historic 
name.  The  benches  everywhere  else  are  crowded  to  their 
utmost  capacity.  Members  who  cannot  get  seats — on 
such  an  occasion  a  goodly  number — stand  below  the  bar 
or  have  to  dispose  themselves  along  the  side  galleries. 
The  celebrities  are  not  confined  to  the  Treasury  benches 
or  those  of  the  leaders  of  opposition.  Here  and  there, 
among  the  independent  members  and  below  the  gangway 
on  both  sides,  are  seen  men  of  influence  and  renown.  At 
the  opening  of  Parliament  in  1846  this  was  especially  to 
be  observed.  The  rising  fame  of  the  Free-trade  leaders 
made  them  almost  like  a  third  great  party  in  the  House 
of  Commons.  The  strangers'  gallery,  the  Speaker's  gal- 
lery, on  such  a  night  are  crowded  to  excess.  The  eye 
surveys  the  whole  House  and  sees  no  vacant  place.  In 
the  very  hum  of  conversation  that  runs  along  the  benches 
there  is  a  tone  of  profound  anxiety.  The  minister  who 
has  to  face  that  House  and  make  the  announcement  for 
which  all  are  waiting  in  a  most  feverish  anxiety  is  a  man 
to  be  envied  by  the  ambitious.  This  time  there  was  a 
curiosity  about  everything.  What  was  the  minister  about 
to  announce  ?  When  and  in  what  fashion  would  he  an- 
nounce it  ?  Would  the  Whig  leaders  speak  before  the 
ministerial  announcement  ?  Would  the  Free-traders  ? 
What  voice  would  first  hint  to  the  expectant  Commons 
the  course  which  political  events  were  destined  to  take  ? 
The  moving  of  an  address  to  the  throne  is  always  a  formal 
piece  of  business.  It  would  be  hardly  possible  for  Cicero 
or  Burke  to  be  very  interesting  when  performing  such  a 
task.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  an  excellent  chance  for  a 
young  beginner.  He  finds  the  house  in  a  sort  of  contempt- 
uously indulgent  mood,  prepared  to  welcome  the  slightest 


FAMINE  FORCES  PEEL'S  HAND.  319 

evidence  of  any  capacity  of  speech  above  the  dullest  medi- 
ocrity. He  can  hardly  say  anything  absurd  or  offensive 
unless  he  goes  absolutely  out  of  his  way  to  make  a  fool  of 
himself ;  and,  on  the  other  hand  he  can  easily  say  his  little 
nothings  in  a  graceful  way,  and  receive  grateful  applause, 
accordingly,  from  an  assembly  which  counts  on  being 
bored,  and  feels  doubly  indebted  to  the  speaker  who  is 
even  in  the  slightest  degree  an  agreeable  disappointment. 
On  this  particular  occasion,  however,  the  duty  of  the  pro- 
poser and  seconder  of  the  address  was  made  specially 
trying  by  the  fact  that  they  had  to  interfere  with  merely 
formal  utterances  between  an  eager  House  and  an  ex- 
citing announcement.  A  certain  piquancy  was  lent,  how- 
ever, to  the  performance  of  the  duty  by  the  fact,  which 
the  speeches  made  evident  beyond  the  possibility  of  mis- 
take, that  the  proposer  of  the  address  knew  quite  well 
what  the  Government  were  about  to  do,  and  that  the 
seconder  knew  nothing  whatever. 

Now  the  formal  task  is  done.  The  address  has  been 
moved  and  seconded.  The  Speaker  puts  the  question  that 
the  address  be  adopted.  Now  is  the  time  for  debate,  if 
debate  there  is  to  be.  On  such  occasions  there  is  always 
some  discussion,  but  it  is  commonly  as  mere  a  piece  of 
formality  as  the  address  itself.  It  is  understood  that  the 
leader  of  opposition  will  say  something  meaning  next  to 
nothing  ;  that  two  or  three  men  will  grumble  vaguely  at 
the  ministry  ;  that  the  leader  of  the  House  will  reply  ;  and 
then  the  affair  is  all  over.  But  on  this  occasion  it  was 
certain  that  some  momentous  announcement  would  have 
to  be  made  ;  and  the  question  was  when  it  would  come. 
Perhaps  no  one  expected  exactly  what  did  happen.  Noth- 
ing can  be  more  unusual  than  for  the  leader  of  the 
House  to  open  the  debate  on  such  an  occasion  ;  and  Sir 
Robert  Peel  was  usually  somewhat  of  a  formalist,  who 
kept  to  the  regular  ways  in  all  that  pertained  to  the  busi- 


820  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

ness  of  the  House.  No  eyes  of  expectation  were  turned, 
therefore,  to  the  ministerial  bench  at  the  moment  after 
the  formal  putting  of  the  question  by  the  Speaker.  It 
was  rather  expected  that  Lord  John  Russell,  or  perhaps 
Mr.  Cobden,  would  rise.  But  a  surprised  murmur  run- 
ning through  all  parts  of  the  House  soon  told  those  who 
could  not  see  the  Treasury  bench  that  something  unusual 
had  happened  ;  and  in  a  moment  the  voice  of  the  Prime- 
minister  was  heard — that  marvellous  voice  of  which  Lord 
Beaconsfleld  says  that  it  had  not  in  his  time  any  equal  in 
the  House,  "unless  we  except  the  thrilling  tones  of 
O'Connell " — and  it  was  known  that  the  great  explanation 
was  coming  at  once. 

The  explanation  even  now,  however,  was  somewhat  de- 
ferred. The  Prime-minister  showed  a  deliberate  inten- 
tion, it  might  have  been  thought,  not  to  come  to  the  point 
at  once.  He  went  into  long  and  labored  explanations  of 
the  manner  in  which  his  mind  had  been  brought  into  a 
change  on  the  subject  of  Free-trade  and  Protection ;  and 
he  gave  exhaustive  calculations  to  show  that  the  reduction 
of  duty  was  constantly  followed  by  expansion  of  the 
revenue,  and  even  a  maintenance  of  high  prices.  The 
duties  on  glass,  the  duties  on  flax,  the  prices  of  salt  pork 
and  domestic  lard,  the  contract  price  of  salt  beef  for  the 
navy — these  and  many  other  such  topics  were  discussed 
at  great  length  and  with  elaborate  fulness  of  detail  in  the 
hearing  of  an  eager  House  anxious  only,  for  that  night, 
to  know  whether  or  not  the  minister  meant  to  introduce 
the  principle  of  Free-trade.  Peel,  however,  made  it  clear 
enough  that  he  had  become  a  complete  convert  to  the 
doctrines  of  the  Manchester  school,  and  that,  in  his 
opinion,  the  time  had  come  when  that  protection  which 
he  had  taken  office  to  maintain  must  forever  be  aban- 
doned. One  sentence  at  the  close  of  his  speech  was  made 
the  occasion  of  much  labored  criticism  and  some  severe 


FAMINE  FORCES  PEEL'S  HAND.  321 

accusation.  It  was  that  in  which  Peel  declared  that  he 
found  it  "no  easy  task  to  insure  the  harmonious  and 
united  action  of  an  ancient  monarchy,  a  proud  aristocracy, 
and  a  reformed  House  of  Commons." 

The  explanation  was  over.  The  House  of  Commons 
were  left  rather  to  infer  than  to  understand  what  the 
Government  proposed  to  do.  Lord  John  Russell  entered 
into  some  personal  explanations  relating  to  his  endeavor 
to  form  a  ministry,  and  the  causes  of  its  failure.  These 
have  not  much  interest  for  a  later  time.  It  might  have 
seemed  that  the  work  of  the  night  was  done.  It  was 
evident  that  the  ministerial  policy  could  not  be  discussed 
then ;  for,  in  fact,  it  had  not  been  announced.  The 
House  knew  that  the  Prime-minister  was  a  convert  to 
the  principles  of  Free-trade ;  but  that  was  all  that  any  one 
could  be  said  to  know  except  those  who  were  in  the 
secrets  of  the  cabinet.  There  appeared,  therefore,  noth- 
ing for  it  but  to  wait  until  the  time  should  come  for  the 
formal  announcement  and  the  full  discussion  of  the 
Government  measures.  Suddenly,  however,  a  new  and 
striking  figure  intervened  in  the  languishing  debate,  and 
filled  the  House  of  Commons  with  a  fresh  life.  There  is 
not  often  to  be  found  in  our  Parliamentary  history  an  ex- 
ample like  this  of  a  sudden  turn  given  to  a  whole  career 
by  a  timely  speech.  The  member  who  rose  to  comment 
on  the  explanation  of  Sir  Robert  Peel  had  been  for  many 
years  in  the  House  of  Commons.  This  was  his  tenth 
session.  He  had  spoken  often  in  each  session.  He  had 
made  many  bold  attempts  to  win  a  name  in  Parliament, 
and  hitherto  his  political  career  had  been  simply  a 
failure.  From  the  hour  when  he  spoke  this  speech  it 
was  one  long,  unbroken,  brilliant  success. 

21 


322  A  1IISTORT  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 


CHAPTER  XVI. 

MB.  DISRAELI. 

THE  speaker  who  rose  into  such  sudden  prominence 
and  something  like  the  position  of  a  party  leader  was  one 
of  the  most  remarkable  men  the  politics  of  the  reign  have 
produced.  Perhaps,  if  the  word  remarkable  were  to  be 
used  in  its  most  strict  sense,  and  without  particular 
reference  to  praise,  it  would  be  just  to  describe  him  as 
emphatically  the  most  remarkable  man  that  the  political 
controversies  of  the  present  reign  have  called  into  power. 
Mr.  Disraeli  entered  the  House  of  Commons  as  Conserva- 
tive member  for  Maidstone  in  1837.  He  was  then  about 
thirty-two  years  of  age.  He  had  previously  made  re- 
peated and  unsuccessful  attempts  to  get  a  seat  in  Parlia- 
ment. He  began  his  political  career  as  an  advanced 
Liberal,  and  had  come  out  under  the  auspices  of  Daniel 
O'Connell  and  Joseph  Hume.  He  had  described  himself  as 
one  who  desired  to  fight  the  battle  of  the  people,  and  who 
was  supported  by  neither  of  the  aristocratic  parties.  He 
failed  again  and  again,  and  apparently  he  began  to  think 
that  it  would  be  a  wiser  thing  to  look  for  the  support  of 
one  or  other  of  the  aristocratic  parties.  He  had  before  this 
given  indications  of  remarkable  literary  talent,  if  indeed 
it  might  not  be  called  genius.  His  novel,  "Vivian  Grey," 
published  when  he  was  in  his  twenty-third  year,  was 
suffused  with  extravagance,  affectation,  and  mere  animal 
spirits ;  but  it  was  full  of  the  evidences  of  a  fresh  and 
brilliant  ability.  The  son  of  a  distinguished  literary 


MR.  DISRAELI.  323 

man,  Mr.  Disraeli  had  probably  at  that  time  only  a  young 
literary  man's  notions  of  politics.  It  is  not  necessary  to 
charge  him  with  deliberate  inconsistency  because  from  hav- 
ing been  a  Radical  of  the  most  advanced  views  he  became 
by  an  easy  leap  a  romantic  Tory.  It  is  not  likely  that  at 
the  beginning  of  his  career  he  had  any  very  clear  ideas 
in  connection  with  the  words  Tory  or  Radical.  lie  wrote 
a  letter  to  Mr.  W.  J.  Fox,  already  described  as  an  eminent 
Unitarian  minister  and  rising  politician,  in  which  he 
declared  that  his  forte  was  sedition.  Most  clever  young 
men  who  are  not  born  to  fortune,  and  who  feel  drawn 
into  political  life,  fancy  too  that  their  forte  is  sedition. 
When  young  Disraeli  found  that  sedition  and  even  ad- 
vanced Radicalism  did  not  do  much  to  get  him  into 
Parliament,  he  probably  began  to  ask  himself  whether  his 
Liberal  convictions  were  so  deeply  rooted  as  to  call  for  the 
sacrifice  of  a  career.  He  thought  the  question  over,  and 
doubtless  found  himself  crystallizing  fast  into  an  advocate 
of  the  established  order  of  things.  In  a  purely  personal 
light  this  was  a  fortunate  conclusion  for  the  ambitious 
young  politician.  He  could  not  then  have  anticipated 
the  extraordinary  change  which  was  to  be  wrought  in 
the  destiny  and  the  composition  of  the  Tory  party  by  the 
eloquence,  the  arguments,  and  the  influence  of  two  men 
who  at  that  time  were  almost  absolutely  unknown.  Mr. 
Cobden  stood  for  the  first  time  as  a  candidate  for  a  seat 
in  Parliament  in  the  year  that  saw  Mr.  Disraeli  elected 
for  the  first  time,  and  Mr.  Cobden  was  unsuccessful. 
Cobden  had  to  wait  four  years  before  he  found  his  way 
into  the  House  of  Commons;  Bright  did  not  become  a 
member  of  Parliament  until  some  two  years  later  still.  It 
was,  however,  the  Anti-Corn-law  agitation  which,  by 
conquering  Peel  and  making  him  its  advocate,  brought 
about  the  memorable  split  in  the  Conservative  party,  and 
carried  away  from  the  cause  of  the  country  squires  nearly 


324  A  1IISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

all  the  men  of  talent  who  had  hitherto  been  with  them. 
A  new  or  middle  party  of  so-called  Peelites  was  formed. 
Graham,  Gladstone,  Sidney  Herbert,  Cardwell,  and  other 
men  of  equal  mark  or  promise,  joined  it,  and  the  country 
party  was  left  to  seek  for  leadership  in  the  earnest  spirit 
and  very  moderate  talents  of  Lord  George  Ben ti  nek.  Mr. 
Disraeli  then  found  his  chance.  His  genius  was  such 
that  it  must  have  made  a  way  for  him  anywhere  and  in 
spite  of  any  competition ;  but  it  is  not  too  much  to  say 
that  his  career  of  political  advancement  might  have  been 
very  different  if,  in  place  of  finding  himself  the  only  man 
of  first-class  ability  in  the  party  to  which  he  had  attached 
himself,  he  had  been  a  member  of  a  party  which  had 
Palmerston  and  Russell  and  Gladstone  and  Graham  for  its 
captains,  and  Cobden  and  Bright  for  its  habitual  sup- 
porters. 

This,  however,  could  not  have  been  in  Mr.  Disraeli's 
thoughts  when  he  changed  from  Radicalism  to  Conserva- 
tism. No  trace  of  the  progress  of  conversion  can  be  found 
in  his  speeches  or  his  writings.  It  is  not  unreasonable  to 
infer  that  he  took  up  Radicalism  at  the  beginning  because 
it  looked  the  most  picturesque  and  romantic  thing  to  do, 
and  that  only  as  he  found  it  fail  to  answer  his  personal 
object  did  it  occur  to  him  that  he  had,  after  all,  more  affin- 
ity with  the  cause  of  the  country  gentlemen.  The  repu- 
tation he  had  made  for  himself  before  his  going  into  Par- 
liament was  of  a  nature  rather  calculated  to  retard  than 
to  advance  a  political  career.  He  was  looked  upon  almost 
universally  as  an  eccentric  and  audacious  adventurer, 
who  was  kept  from  being  dangerous  by  the  affectations 
and  absurdities  of  his  conduct.  He  dressed  in  the  extrem- 
est  style  of  preposterous  foppery ;  he  talked  a  blending 
of  cynicism  and  sentiment ;  he  had  made  the  most  reck- 
less statements ;  his  boasting  was  almost  outrageous  ;  his 
rhetoric  of  abuse  was,  even  in  that  free-spoken  time, 


MR.  DISRAELI.  325 

astonishingly  vigorous  and  unrestrained.  Even  his  liter- 
ary efforts  did  not  then  receive  anything  like  the  appreci- 
ation they  have  obtained  since.  At  that  time  they  were 
regarded  rather  as  audacious  whimsicalities,  the  fantastic 
freaks  of  a  clever  youth,  than  as  genuine  works  of  a  cer- 
tain kind  of  art.  Even  when  he  did  get  into  the  House 
of  Commons,  his  first  experience  there  was  little  calcu- 
lated to  give  him  much  hope  of  success.  Reading  over 
this  first  speech  now,  it  seems  hard  to  understand  why  it 
should  have  excited  so  much  laughter  and  derision ;  why 
it  should  have  called  forth  nothing  but  laughter  and  deri- 
sion. It  is  a  clever  speech,  full  of  point  and  odd  conceits ; 
very  like  in  style  arid  structure  many  of  the  speeches 
which  in  later  years  won  for  the  same  orator  the  applause 
of  the  House  of  Commons.  But  Mr.  Disraeli's  reputation 
had  preceded  him  into  the  House.  Up  to  this  time  his 
life  had  been,  says  an  unfriendly  but  not  an  unjust  critic, 
"  an  almost  uninterrupted  career  of  follies  and  defeats." 
The  House  was  probably  in  a  humor  to  find  the  speech 
ridiculous  because  the  general  impression  was  that  the 
man  himself  was  ridiculous.  Mr.  Disraeli's  appearance, 
too,  no  doubt,  contributed  something  to  the  contemptu- 
ous opinion  which  was  formed  of  him  on  his  first  attempt 
to  address  the  assembly  which  he  afterward  came  to  rule. 
He  is  described  by  an  observer  as  having  been  attired  "  in 
a  bottle-green  frock-coat  and  a  waistcoat  of  white,  of  the 
Dick  Swiveller  pattern,  the  front  of  which  exhibited  a 
net-work  of  glittering  chains ;  large  fancy- pattern  panta- 
loons, and  a  black  tie,  above  which  no  shirt-collar  was 
visible,  completed  the  outward  man.  A  countenance 
lividly  pale,  set  out  by  a  pair  of  intensely  black  eyes,  and 
a  broad  but  not  very  high  forehead,  overhung  by  cluster- 
ing ringlets  of  coal-black  hair,  which,  combed  away  from 
the  right  temple,  fell  in  bunches  of  well-oiled  small 
ringlets  over  his  left  cheek."  His  manner  was  intensely 


326  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

theatric;  his  gestures  were  wild  and  extravagant.  In  all 
this  there  is  not  much,  however,  to  surprise  those  who 
knew  Mr.  Disraeli  in  his  greater  days.  His  style  was 
always  extravagant ;  his  rhetoric  constantly  degenerated 
into  vulgarity ;  his  whole  manner  was  that  of  the  typical 
foreigner  whom  English  people  regard  as  the  illustration 
of  all  that  is  vehement  and  unquiet.  But  whatever  the 
cause,  it  is  certain  that  on  the  occasion  of  his  first  attempt 
Mr.  Disraeli  made  not  merely  a  failure,  but  even  a  ludi- 
crous failure.  One  who  heard  the  debate  thus  describes 
the  manner  in  which,  baffled  by  the  persistent  laughter 
and  other  interruptions  of  the  noisy  House,  the  orator 
withdrew  from  the  discussion,  defeated  but  not  dis- 
couraged. "  At  last,  losing  his  temper,  which  until  now 
he  had  preserved  in  a  wonderful  manner,  he  paused  in 
the  midst  of  a  sentence,  and  looking  the  Liberals  indig- 
nantly in  the  face,  raised  his  hands,  and,  opening  his 
mouth  as  widely  as  its  dimensions  would  admit,  said,  in 
a  remarkably  loud  and  almost  terrific  tone,  *I  have 
begun,  several  times,  many  things,  and  I  have  often  suc- 
ceeded at  last ;  ay,  sir,  and  though  I  sit  down  now,  the 
time  will  come  when  you  will  hear  me.'  "  This  final  pre- 
diction is  so  like  what  a  manufacturer  of  biography  would 
make  up  for  a  hero,  and  is  so  like  what  was  actually  said 
hi  one  or  two  other  remarkable  instances,  that  a  reader 
might  be  excused  for  doubting  its  authenticity  in  this 
case.  But  nothing  can  be  more  certain  than  the  fact  that 
Mr.  Disraeli  did  bring  to  a  close  his  maiden  speech  in  the 
House  of  Commons  with  this  bold  prediction.  The  words 
are  to  be  found  in  the  reports  published  next  morning  in 
all  the  daily  papers  of  the  metropolis. 

It  was  thus  that  Mr.  Disraeli  began  his  career  as  a  Par- 
liamentary orator.  It  is  a  curious  fact  that  on  that  occa- 
sion almost  the  only  one  of  his  hearers  who  seems  to  have 
admired  the  speech  was  Sir  Robert  Peel.  It  is  by  bis 


MR.  DISRAELI.  327 

philippic  against  Peel  that  Disraeli  is  now  about  to  con- 
vince the  House  of  Commons  that  the  man  they  laughed 
at  before  is  a  great  Parliamentary  orator. 

Disraeli  was  not  in  the  least  discouraged  by  his  first 
failure.  A  few  days  after  it  he  spoke  again,  and  he  spoke 
three  or  four  times  more  during  his  first  session.  But  he 
had  learned  some  wisdom  by  rough  experience,  and  he  did 
not  make  his  oratorical  flights  so  long  or  so  ambitious  as 
that  first  attempt.  Then  he  seemed  after  awhile,  as  he 
grew  more  familiar  with  the  House,  to  go  in  for  being 
paradoxical ;  for  making  himself  always  conspicuous  ;  for 
taking  up  positions  and  expounding  political  creeds  which 
other  men  would  have  avoided.  It  is  very  difficult  to  get 
any  clear  idea  of  what  his  opinions  were  about  this  period 
of  his  career,  if  he  had  any  political  opinions  at  all.  Our 
impression  is  that  he  really  had  no  opinions  at  that  time ; 
that  he  was  only  in  quest  of  opinions.  He  spoke  on  sub- 
jects of  which  it  was  evident  that  he  knew  nothing,  and 
sometimes  he  managed,  by  the  sheer  force  of  a  strong 
intelligence,  to  discern  the  absurdity  of  economic  sophis- 
tries which  had  baffled  men  of  far  greater  experience,  and 
which,  indeed,  to  judge  from  his  personal  declarations 
and  political  conduct  afterward,  he  allowed  before  long 
to  baffle  and  bewilder  himself.  More  often,  however,  he 
talked  with  a  grandiose  and  oracular  vagueness  which 
seemed  to  imply  that  he  alone  of  all  men  saw  into  the 
very  heart  of  the  question,  but  that  he  of  all  men  must 
not  yet  reveal  what  he  saw.  At  his  best  of  times  Mr. 
Disraeli  was  an  example  of  that  class  of  being  whom  Mac- 
aulay  declares  to  be  so  rare  that  Lord  Chatham  appears 
to  him  almost  a  solitary  illustration  of  it — "  a  great  man 
of  real  genius,  and  of  a  brave,  lofty,  and  commanding 
spirit,  without  simplicity  of  character."  What  Macaulay 
goes  on  to  say  of  Chatham  will  bear  quotation  too.  "  lie 
was  an  actor  in  the  closet,  an  actor  at  council,  an  actor  in 


828  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

Parliament ;  and  even  in  private  society  he  could  not  lay 
aside  his  theatrical  tones  and  attitudes."  Mr.  Disraeli  was 
at  one  period  of  his  career  so  affected  that  he  positively 
affected  affectation.  Yet  he  was  a  man  of  undoubted 
genius ;  he  had  a  spirit  that  never  quailed  under  stress 
of  any  circumstances,  however  disheartening;  he  com- 
manded as  scarcely  any  statesman  since  Chatham  himself 
has  been  able  to  do ;  and  it  would  be  unjust  and  absurd 
to  deny  to  a  man  gifted  with  qualities  like  these  the  pos- 
session of  a  lofty  nature. 

For  some  time  Mr.  Disraeli  then  seemed  resolved  to 
make  himself  remarkable — to  be  talked  about.  lie  suc- 
ceeded admirably.  He  was  talked  about.  All  the  political 
and  satirical  journals  of  the  day  had  a  great  deal  to  say 
about  him.  He  is  not  spoken  of  in  terms  of  praise  as  a 
rule ;  neither  has  he  much  praise  to  shower  about  him. 
Any  one  who  looks  back  to  the  political  controversies  of 
that  time  will  be  astounded  at  the  language  which  Mr. 
Disraeli  addresses  to  his  opponents  of  the  press,  and  which 
his  opponents  addressed  to  him.  In  some  cases  it  is  no 
exaggeration  to  say  that  a  squabble  between  two  Billings- 
gate fish- women  hi  our  day  would  have  good  chance  of 
ending  without  the  use  of  words  and  phrases  so  coarse  as 
those  which  then  passed  between  this  brilliant  literary 
man  and  some  of  his  assailants.  We  have  all  read  the 
history  of  the  controversy  between  him  and  O'Connell,  and 
the  savage  ferocity  of  the  language  with  which  O'Connell 
denounced  him  as  "  a  miscreant,"  as  "  a  wretch,"  "  a  liar," 
"  whose  life  is  a  living  lie ; "  and,  finally,  as  "  the  heir-at- 
law  of  the  blasphemous  thief  who  died  impenitent  on  the 
Cross."  Mr.  Disraeli  begins  his  reply  by  describing  him- 
self as  one  of  those  who  "  will  not  be  insulted  even  by  a 
Yahoo  without  chastising  it; "  and  afterward,  in  a  letter 
to  one  of  Mr.  O'Connell's  sons,  declares  his  desire  to 
express  "  the  utter  scorn  in  which  I  hold  his  [Mr.  O'Con- 


MR.  DISRAELI.  329 

nell's]  character,  and  the  disgust  with  which  his  conduct 
inspires  me ; "  and  informs  the  son  that  "  I  shall  take 
every  opportunity  of  holding  your  father's  name  up  to 
public  contempt,  and  I  fervently  pray  that  you  or  some 
one  of  your  blood  may  attempt  to  avenge  the  inextin- 
guishable hatred  with  which  I  shall  pursue  his  existence." 
In  reading  of  a  controversy  like  this  between  two  public 
men,  we  seem  to  be  transported  back  to  an  age  having 
absolutely  nothing  in  common  with  our  own.  It  appears 
almost  impossible  to  believe  that  men  still  active  in  politi- 
cal life  were  active  in  political  life  then.  Yet  this  is  not 
the  most  astonishing  specimen  of  the  sort  of  controversy 
in  which  Mr.  Disraeli  became  engaged  in  his  younger 
days.  Nothing,  perhaps,  that  the  political  literature  of 
the  time  preserves  could  exceed  the  ferocity  of  his  con- 
troversial duel  with  O'Connell ;  but  there  are  many  sam- 
ples of  the  rhetoric  of  abuse  to  be  found  in  the  journals 
of  the  time  which  would  far  less  bear  exposure  to  the 
gaze  of  the  fastidious  public  of  our  day.  The  duelling 
system  survived  then  and  for  long  after,  and  Mr.  Disraeli 
always  professed  himself  ready  to  sustain  with  his  pistol 
anything  that  his  lips  might  have  given  utterance  to, 
even  in  the  reckless  heat  of  controversy.  The  social 
temper  which  in  our  time  insists  that  the  first  duty  of  a 
gentleman  is  to  apologize  for  an  unjust  or  offensive 
expression  used  in  debate,  was  unknown  then.  Perhaps 
it  could  hardly  exist  to  any  great  extent  in  the  com- 
pany of  the  duelling  system.  When  a  man's  withdrawal 
of  an  offensive  expression  might  be  imputed  to  a  want  of 
physical  courage,  the  courtesy  which  impels  a  gentle- 
man to  atone  for  a  wrong  is  not  likely  to  triumph  very 
often  over  the  fear  of  being  accounted  a  coward.  If  any 
one  doubts  the  superiority  of  manners  as  well  as  of 
morals  which  comes  of  our  milder  ways,  he  has  only  to 
read  a  few  specimens  of  the  controversies  of  Mr.  Disraeli's 


830  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

earlier  days,  when  men  who  aspired  to  be  considered  great 
political  leaders  thought  it  not  unbecoming  to  call  names 
like  a  costermonger,  and  to  swagger  like  Bobadil  or  the 
Copper  Captain. 

Mr.  Disraeli  kept  himself  well  up  to  the  level  of  his 
time  in  the  calling  of  names  and  the  swaggering ;  but  he 
was  making  himself  remarkable  in  political  controversy 
as  well.  In  the  House  of  Commons  he  began  to  be 
regarded  as  a  dangerous  adversary  in  debate.  He  was 
wonderfully  ready  with  retort  and  sarcasm.  But  during 
all  the  earlier  part  of  his  career  he  was  thought  of  only 
as  a  free  lance.  He  had  praised  Peel  when  Peel  said  some- 
thing that  suited  him,  or  when  to  praise  Peel  seemed 
likely  to  wound  some  one  else.  But  it  was  during  the 
debates  on  the  abolition  of  the  Corn-laws  that  he  first 
rose  to  the  fame  of  a  great  debater  and  a  powerful  Parlia- 
mentary orator.  We  use  the  words  Parliamentary  orator 
with  the  purpose  of  conveying  a  special  qualification.  He 
is  a  great  Parliamentary  orator  who  can  employ  the  kind 
of  eloquence  and  argument  which  tells  most  readily  on 
Parliament.  But  it  must  not  be  supposed  that  the  great 
Parliamentary  orator  is  necessarily  a  great  orator  in  the 
wider  sense.  Some  of  the  men  who  made  the  greatest 
successes  as  Parliamentary  orators  have  failed  to  win  any 
genuine  reputations  as  orators  of  the  broader  and  higher 
school.  The  fame  of  Charles  Townshend's  "  champagne 
speech  "  has  vanished,  evanescent  almost  as  the  bubbles 
from  which  it  derived  its  inspiration  and  its  name.  No 
one  now  reads  many  even  of  the  fragments  preserved  for 
us  of  those  speeches  of  Sheridan  which  those  who  heard 
them  declared  to  have  surpassed  all  ancient  and  modern 
eloquence.  The  House  of  Commons  often  found  Burke 
dull,  and  the  speeches  of  Burke  have  passed  into  English 
literature  secure  of  a  perpetual  place  there.  Mr.  Disraeli 
never  succeeded  in  being  more  than  a  Parliamentary 


MR.  DISRAELI.  831 

orator,  and  probably  would  not  have  cared  to  be  anything 
more.  But  even  at  this  comparatively  early  date,  and 
while  he  had  still  the  reputation  of  being  a  whimsical, 
self-confident,  and  feather-headed  adventurer,  he  soon 
won  for  himself  the  name  of  one  who  could  hold  his  own 
in  retort  and  in  sarcasm  against  any  antagonist.  The 
days  cf  the  more  elaborate  oratory  were  going  by,  and 
the  time  was  coming  when  the  pungent  epigram,  the 
sparkling  paradox,  the  rattling  attack,  the  vivid  repartee, 
would  count  for  the  most  attractive  part  of  eloquence  with 
the  House  of  Commons. 

Mr.  Disraeli  was  exactly  the  man  to  succeed  under  the 
new  conditions  of  Parliamentary  eloquence.  Hitherto  he 
had  wanted  a  cause  to  inspire  and  justify  audacity,  and 
on  which  to  employ  with  effect  his  remarkable  resources 
of  sarcasm  and  rhetoric.  Hitherto  he  had  addressed  an 
audience  out  of  sympathy  with  him  for  the  most  part. 
Now  he  was  about  to  become  the  spokesman  of  a  large 
body  of  men  who,  chafing  and  almost  choking  with  wrath, 
were  not  capable  of  speaking  effectively  for  themselves. 
Mr.  Disraeli  did,  therefore,  the  very  wisest  thing  he  could 
do  when  he  launched  at  once  into  a  savage  personal  attack 
upon  Sir  Robert  Peel.  This  speech  abounds  in  passages 
of  audaciously  powerful  sarcasm.  "  I  am  not  one  of  the 
converts,"  Mr.  Disraeli  said.  "  I  am  perhaps  a  member  of 
a  fallen  party.  To  the  opinions  which  I  have  expressed 
in  this  House  in  favor  of  Protection  I  still  adhere.  They 
sent  me  to  this  House,  and  if  I  had  relinquished  them  I 
should  have  relinquished  my  seat  also."  That  was  the 
key-note  of  the  speech.  He  denounced  Sir  Robert  Peel, 
not  for  having  changed  his  opinions,  but  for  having  re- 
tained a  position  which  enabled  him  to  betray  his  party. 
He  compared  Peel  to  the  Lord  High- Admiral  of  the  Turk- 
ish fleet,  who,  at  a  great  warlike  crisis,  when  he  was 
placed  at  the  head  of  the  finest  armament  that  ever  left 


332  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

the  Dardanelles  since  the  days  of  Solyman  the  Great, 
steered  at  once  for  the  enemy's  port,  and  when  arraigned 
as  a  traitor,  said  that  he  really  saw  no  use  in  prolonging 
a  hopeless  struggle,  and  that  he  had  accepted  the  com- 
mand of  the  fleet  only  to  put  the  Sultan  out  of  pain  by 
bringing  the  struggle  to  a  close  at  once.  "  Well  do  we 
remember,  on  this  side  of  the  House — not,  perhaps,  with- 
out a  blush — the  efforts  we  made  to  raise  him  to  the  bench 
where  he  now  sits.  "Who  does  not  remember  the  sacred 
cause  of  Protection  for  which  sovereigns  were  thwarted, 
Parliament  dissolved,  and  a  nation  taken  in  ?  "  "I  belong 
to  a  party  which  can  triumph  no  more,  for  we  have  noth- 
ing left  on  our  side  except  the  constituencies  which  we 
have  not  betrayed."  He  denounced  Peel  as  "  a  man  who 
never  originates  an  idea ;  a  watcher  of  the  atmosphere ; 
a  man  who  takes  his  observations,  and  when  he  finds  the 
wind  in  a  particular  quarter  trims  his  sails  to  suit  it ; " 
and  he  declared  that  "  such  a  man  may  be  a  powerful 
minister,  but  he  is  no  more  a  great  statesman  than  the 
man  who  gets  up  behind  a  carriage  is  a  great  whip." 

"  The  opportune,"  says  Mr.  Disraeli  himself  in  his  "  Lord 
George  Bentinck,"  "  in  a  popular  assembly  has  sometimes 
more  success  than  the  weightiest  efforts  of  research  and 
reason."  He  is  alluding  to  this  very  speech,  of  which  he 
says,  with  perhaps  a  superfluous  modesty,  that  "  it  was 
the  long-constrained  passion  of  the  House  that  now  found 
a  vent,  far  more  than  the  sallies  of  the  speaker,  that 
changed  the  frigid  silence  of  this  senate  into  excitement 
and  tumult."  The  speech  was  indeed  opportune.  But  it 
was  opportune  in  a  far  larger  sense  than  as  a  timely  phi- 
lippic rattling  up  an  exhausted  and  disappointed  House. 
That  moment  when  Disraeli  rose  was  the  very  turning- 
point  of  the  fortunes  of  his  party.  There  was  genius, 
there  was  positive  statesmanship,  in  seizing  so  boldly  and 
so  adroitly  on  the  moment.  It  would  have  been  a  great 


ME.  DISRAELI.  333 

thing  gained  for  Peel  if  he  could  have  got  through  that 
first  night  without  any  alarm-note  of  opposition  from  his 
own  side.  The  habits  of  Parliamentary  discipline  are 
very  clinging.  They  are  hard  to  tear  away.  Every  im- 
pulse of  association  and  training  protests  against  the  very 
effort  to  rend  them  asunder.  A  once  powerful  minister 
exercises  a  control  over  his  long  obedient  followers  some- 
what like  that  of  the  heart  of  the  Bruce  in  the  fine  old 
Scottish  story.  Those  who  once  followed  will  still  obey 
the  name  and  the  symbol  even  when  the  actual  power  to 
lead  is  gone  forever.  If  one  other  night's  habitude  had 
been  added  to  the  long  discipline  that  bound  his  party  to 
Peel,  if  they  had  allowed  themselves  to  listen  to  that 
declaration  of  the  session's  first  night  without  murmur, 
perhaps  they  might  never  have  rebelled.  Mr.  Disraeli 
drew  together  into  one  focus  all  the  rays  of  their  gather- 
ing  anger  against  Peel,  and  made  them  light  into  a  flame. 
He  showed  the  genius  of  the  born  leader  by  stepping  forth 
at  the  critical  moment  and  giving  the  word  of  command. 
From  that  hour  Mr.  Disraeli  was  the  real  leader  of  the 
Tory  squires  ;  from  that  moment  his  voice  gave  the  word 
of  command  to  the  Tory  party.  There  was  peculiar 
courage,  too,  in  the  part  he  took.  He  must  have  known 
that  he  was  open  to  one  retort  from  Peel  that  might  have 
crushed  a  less  confident  man.  It  was  well  known  that 
when  Peel  was  coming  into  power  Disraeli  expected  to  be 
offered  a  place  of  some  kind  in  the  ministry,  and  would 
have  accepted  it.  Mr.  Disraeli  afterward  explained,  when 
Peel  made  allusion  to  the  fact,  that  he  never  had  put  him- 
self directly  forward  as  a  candidate  for  office ;  but  there 
had  undoubtedly  been  some  negotiation  going  forward 
which  was  conducted  on  Mr.  Disraeli's  side  by  some  one 
who  supposed  he  was  doing  what  Disraeli  would  like  to 
have  done ;  and  Peel  had  not  taken  any  hint,  and  would 
not  in  any  way  avail  himself  of  Disraeli's  services.  Dis- 


334  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

raeli  must  have  known  that  when  he  attacked  Peel,  the 
latter  would  hardly  fail  to  make  use  of  this  obvious  retort ; 
but  he  felt  little  daunted  on  that  score.  He  could  have 
made  a  fair  enough  defence  of  his  consistency  in  any  case, 
but  he  knew  very  well  that  what  the  indignant  Tories 
wanted  just  then  was  not  a  man  who  had  been  uniformly 
consistent,  but  one  who  could  attack  Sir  Robert  Peel 
without  scruple  and  with  effect.  Disraeli  made  his  own 
career  by  the  course  he  took  on  that  memorable  night, 
and  he  also  made  a  new  career  for  the  Tory  party. 

Now  that  he  had  proved  himself  so  brilliant  a  spadassin 
in  this  debate,  men  began  to  remember  that  he  had  dealt 
trenchant  blows  before.  Many  of  his  sentences  attacking 
Peel,  which  have  passed  into  familiar  quotation  almost 
like  proverbs,  were  spoken  in  1845.  He  had  accused  the 
great  minister  of  having  borrowed  his  tactics  from  the 
Whigs.  "  The  right  honorable  gentleman  caught  the 
Whigs  bathing,  and  he  walked  away  with  their  clothes. 
He  has  left  them  in  the  full  enjoyment  of  their  liberal 
position,  and  he  is  himself  a  strict  conservative  of  their 
garments."  "  I  look  on  the  right-honorable  gentleman  as 
a  man  who  has  tamed  the  shrew  of  Liberalism  by  her 
own  tactics.  He  is  the  political  Petruchio  who  has  outbid 
you  all."  "  If  the  right-honorable  gentleman  would  only 
stick  to  quotation  instead  of  having  recourse  to  obloquy, 
he  may  rely  upon  it  he  would  find  it  a  safer  weapon.  It 
is  one  he  always  wields  with  the  hand  of  a  master,  and 
when  he  does  appeal  to  any  authority  in  prose  or  verse, 
he  is  sure  to  be  successful,  partly  because  he  seldom 
quotes  a  passage  that  has  not  already  received  the  meed 
of  Parliamentary  approbation."  We  can  all  readily  under- 
stand how  such  a  hit  as  the  last  would  tell  in  the  case  of 
an  orator  like  Peel,  who  had  the  old-fashioned  way  of 
Introducing  long  quotations  from  approved  classic  authors 
into  his  speeches,  and  who  not  unfrequently  introduced 


MR.  DISRAELI.  335 

citations  which  were  received  with  all  the  better  welcome 
by  the  House  because  of  the  familiarity  of  their  language. 
More  fierce  and  cutting  was  the  reference  to  Canning, 
with  whom  Peel  had  quarrelled,  and  the  implied  contrast 
of  Canning  with  Peel.  Sir  Robert  had  cited  against  Dis- 
raeli Canning's  famous  lines  praying  to  be  saved  from  a 
"  candid  friend."  Disraeli  seized  the  opportunity  thus 
given.  "The  name  of  Canning  is  one,"  he  said,  " never 
to  be  mentioned,  I  am  sure,  in  this  House  without  emotion. 
We  all  admire  his  genius ;  we  all,  or  at  least  most  of  us, 
deplore  his  untimely  end ;  and  we  all  sympathize  with 
him  in  his  severe  struggle  with  supreme  prejudice  and 
sublime  mediocrity,  with  inveterate  foes  and  with  candid 
friends."  The  phrase  "  sublime  mediocrity  "  had  a  mar- 
vellous effect.  As  a  hostile  description  of  Peel's  character 
it  had  enough  of  seeming  truth  about  it  to  tell  most  effect- 
ively alike  on  friends  and  enemies  of  the  great  leader. 
A  friend,  or  even  an  impartial  enemy,  would  not  indeed 
admit  that  it  accurately  described  Peel's  intellect  and 
position;  but  as  a  stroke  of  personal  satire  it  touched 
nearly  enough  the  characteristics  of  its  object  to  impress 
itself  at  once  as  a  master-hit  on  the  minds  of  all  who 
caught  its  instant  purpose.  The  words  remained  in  use 
long  after  the  controversy  and  its  occasion  had  passed 
away  ;  and  it  was  allowed  that  an  unfriendly  and  bitter 
critic  could  hardly  have  found  a  phrase  more  suited  to  its 
ungenial  purpose  or  more  likely  to  connect  itself  at  once 
in  the  public  mind  with  the  name  of  him  who  was  its 
object.  Mr.  Disraeli  did  not,  in  fact,  greatly  admire  Can- 
ning. He  has  left  a  very  disparaging  criticism  of  Canning 
as  an  orator  in  one  of  his  novels.  On  the  other  hand,  he 
has  shown  in  his  "  Life  of  Lord  George  Bentinck  "  that  he 
could  do  full  justice  to  some  of  the  greatest  qualities  of 
Sir  Robert  Peel.  But  at  the  moment  of  his  attacking 
Peel  and  crying  up  Canning  he  was  only  concerned  to 


336  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

disparage  the  one,  and  it  was  on  this  account  that  he 
eulogized  the  other.  The  famous  sentence,  too,  in  which 
he  declared  that  a  Conservative  Government  was  an 
r,  "  organized  hypocrisy,"  was  spoken  during  the  debates  of 
the  session  of  1845,  before  the  explanation  of  the  minister 
on  the  subject  of  Free-trade.  All  these  brilliant  things 
men  now  began  to  recall.  Looking  back  from  this  dis- 
tance of  time,  we  can  see  well  enough  that  Mr.  Disraeli 
had  displayed  his  peculiar  genius  long  before  the  House 
of  Commons  took  the  pains  to  recognize  it.  From  the 
night  of  the  opening  of  the  session  of  1846  it  was  never 
questioned.  Thenceforward  he  was  really  the  mouth- 
piece and  the  sense-carrier  of  his  party.  For  some  time 
to  come,  indeed,  his  nominal  post  might  have  seemed  to 
be  only  that  of  its  bravo.  The  country  gentlemen  who 
cheered  to  the  echo  his  fierce  attacks  on  Peel  during  the 
debates  of  the  session  of  1846,  had  probably  not  the 
slightest  suspicion  that  the  daring  rhetorician  who  was 
so  savagely  revenging  them  on  their  now  hated  leader 
was  a  man  of  as  cool  a  judgment,  as  long  a  head,  and  as 
complete  a  capacity  for  the  control  of  a  party  as  any  poli- 
tician who  for  generations  had  appeared  in  the  House  of 
Commons. 

One  immediate  effect  of  the  turn  thus  given  by  Dis- 
raeli's timely  intervention  in  the  debate  was  the  forma- 
tion of  a  Protection  party  in  the  House  of  Commons. 
The  leadership  of  this  perilous  adventure  was  intrusted 
to  Lord  George  Bentinck,  a  sporting  nobleman  of  ener- 
getic character,  great  tenacity  of  purpose  and  conviction, 
and  a  not  inconsiderable  aptitude  for  politics,  which  had 
hitherto  had  no  opportunity  for  either  exercising  or  dis- 
playing itself.  Lord  George  Bentinck  had  sat  in  eight 
Parliaments  without  taking  part  in  any  great  debate. 
When  he  -was  suddenly  drawn  into  the  leadership  of  the 
Protection  party  in  the  House  of  Commons,  he  gave  him- 


ME.  DISRAELI.  337 

self  up  to  it  entirely.  He  had  at  first  only  joined  the 
party  as  one  of  its  organizers  ;  but  he  showed  himself  in 
many  respects  well  fitted  for  the  leadership,  and  the 
choice  of  leaders  was  in  any  case  very  limited.  When 
once  he  had  accepted  the  position,  he  was  unwearying  in 
his  attention  to  its  duties ;  and,  indeed,  up  to  the  moment 
of  his  sudden  and  premature  death  he  never  allowed  him- 
self any  relaxation  from  the  cares  it  imposed  on  him. 
Mr.  Disraeli,  in  his  "  Life  of  Lord  George  Bentinck,"  has 
indeed  overrated,  with  the  pardonable  extravagance  of 
friendship,  the  intellectual  gifts  of  his  leader.  Bentinck's 
abilities  were  hardly  even  of  the  second  class ;  and  the 
amount  of  knowledge  which  he  brought  to  bear  on  the 
questions  he  discussed  with  so  much  earnestness  and  en- 
ergy was  often  and  of  necessity  little  better  than  mere 
cram.  But  in  Parliament  the  essential  qualities  of  a 
leader  are  not  great  powers  of  intellect.  A  man  of  cool 
head,  good  temper,  firm  will,  and  capacity  for  appreciating 
the  serviceable  qualities  of  other  men,  may  always,  pro- 
vided that  he  has  high  birth  and  great  social  influence, 
make  a  very  successful  leader,  even  though  he  be  want- 
ing altogether  in  the  higher  attributes  of  eloquence  and 
statesmanship.  It  may  be  doubtful  whether,  on  the 
whole,  great  eloquence  and  genius  are  necessary  at  all  to 
the  leader  of  a  party  in  Parliament  in  times  not  specially 
troublous.  Bentinck  had  patience,  energy,  good-humor, 
and  considerable  appreciation  of  the  characters  of  men. 
If  he  had  a  bad  voice,  was  a  poor  speaker,  talked  absolute 
nonsense  about  protective  duties  and  sugar  and  guano,  ana 
made  up  absurd  calculations  to  prove  impossibilities  and 
paradoxes,  he  at  least  always  spoke  in  full  faith,  and  was 
only  the  more  necessary  to  his  party  because  he  could  hon- 
estly continue  to  believe  in  the  old  doctrines,  no  matter  what 
political  economy  and  hard  facts  might  say  to  the  contrary. 
Tlie  secession  was,  therefore,  hi  full  course  of  organiza- 

22 


338  -4  IIISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

tion.  On  January  27th  Sir  Robert  Peel  came  forward  to 
explain  his  financial  policy.  It  is  almost  superfluous  to 
say  that  the  most  intense  anxiety  prevailed  all  over  the 
country,  and  that  the  House  was  crowded.  An  incident 
of  the  night,  which  then  created  a  profound  sensation, 
would  not  be  worth  noticing  now  but  for  the  evidence  it 
gives  of  the  bitterness  with  which  the  Protection  party 
were  filled,  and  of  the  curiously  bad  taste  of  which  gen- 
tlemen of  position  and  education  can  be  guilty  under  the 
inspiration  of  a  blind  fanaticism.  There  is  something 
ludicrous  in  the  pompous  tone,  as  of  righteous  indigna- 
tion deliberately  repressed,  with  which  Mr.  Disraeli,  in 
his  "  Life  of  Bentinck,"  announces  the  event.  The  pro- 
ceedings in  the  House  of  Commons,  he  says,  "  were  ush- 
ered in  by  a  startling  occurrence."  What  was  this  por- 
tentous preliminary?  "His  Royal  Highness  the  Prince 
Consort,  attended  by  the  Master  of  the  Horse,  appeared 
and  took  his  seat  in  the  body  of  the  House  to  listen  to 
the  statement  of  the  First  Minister."  In  other  words, 
there  was  to  be  a  statement  of  great  importance  and  a 
debate  of  profound  interest,  and  the  husband  of  the  Queen 
was  anxious  to  be  a  listener.  The  Prince  Consort  did 
not  understand  that  because  he  had  married  the  Queen 
he  was  therefore  to  be  precluded  from  hearing  a  discus- 
sion in  the  House  of  Commons.  The  poorest  man  and 
the  greatest  man  in  the  land  were  alike  free  to  occupy  a 
seat  in  one  of  the  galleries  of  the  House,  and  it  is  not  to 
be  wondered  at  if  the  Prince  Consort  fancied  that  he  too 
might  listen  to  a  debate  without  unhinging  the  British 
Constitution.  Lord  George  Bentinck  and  the  Protec- 
tionists were  aflame  with  indignation.  They  saw  in  the 
quiet  presence  of  the  intelligent  gentleman  who  came  to 
listen  to  the  discussion  an  attempt  to  overawe  the  Com- 
mons and  compel  them  to  bend  to  the  will  of  the  Crown. 
It  is  not  easy  to  read  without  a  feeling  of  shame  tHe  ab- 


MR.  DISRAELI.  339 

surd  and  unseemly  comments  which  were  made  upon  this 
harmless  incident.  The  Queen  herself  has  given  an  ex- 
planation of  the  Prince's  visit  which  is  straightforward 
and  dignified.  "  The  Prince  merely  went,  as  the  Prince 
of  Wales  and  the  Queen's  other  sons  do,  for  once,  to  hear 
a  fine  debate,  which  is  so  useful  to  all  princes."  "  But 
this,"  the  Queen  adds,  "  he  naturally  felt  unable  to  do 
again." 

The  Prime-minister  announced  his  policy.  His  object 
was  to  abandon  the  sliding-scale  altogether ;  but  for  the 
present  he  intended  to  impose  a  duty  of  ten  shillings  a 
quarter  on  corn  when  the  price  of  it  was  under  forty- 
eight  shillings  a  quarter;  to  reduce  that  duty  by  one 
shilling  for  every  shilling  of  rise  in  price  until  it  reached 
fifty-three  shillings  a  quarter,  when  the  duty  should  fall 
to  four  shillings.  This  arrangement  was,  however,  only 
to  hold  good  for  three  years,  at  the  end  of  which  time 
protective  duties  on  grain  were  to  be  wholly  abandoned. 
Peel  explained  that  he  intended  gradually  to  apply  the 
principle  of  Free-trade  to  manufactures  and  every  de- 
scription of  produce,  bearing  in  mind  the  necessity  of 
providing  for  the  expenditure  of  the  country,  and  of 
smoothing  away  some  of  the  difficulties  which  a  sudden 
withdrawal  of  protection  might  cause.  The  differential 
duties  on  sugar,  which  were  professedly  intended  to  pro- 
tect the  growers  of  free  sugars  against  the  competition  of 
those  who  cultivated  sugar  by  the  use  of  slave  labor, 
were  to  be  diminished,  but  not  abolished.  The  duties  on 
the  importation  of  foreign  cattle  were  to  be  at  once  re- 
moved. In  order  to  compensate  the  agricultural  inter- 
ests for  the  gradual  withdrawal  of  protective  duties,  there 
were  to  be  some  readjustments  of  local  burdens.  We 
need  not  dwell  much  on  this  part  of  the  explanation. 
We  are  familiar  in  late  years  with  the  ingenious  man- 
ner in  which  the  principle  of  the  readjustment  of  local 


340  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

burdens  is  worked  in  the  hope  of  conciliating  the  agri- 
cultural interests.  These  readjustments  are  not  usually 
received  with  any  great  gratitude  or  attended  by  any  par- 
ticular success.  In  this  instance  Sir  Robert  Peel  could 
hardly  have  laid  much  serious  stress  on  them.  If  the 
land-owners  and  farmers  had  really  any  just  ground  of 
complaint  hi  the  abolition  of  protection,  the  salve  which 
was  applied  to  their  wound  would  scarcely  have  caused 
them  to  forget  its  pains.  The  important  part  of  the  ex- 
planation, so  far  as  history  is  concerned,  consisted  in  the 
fact  that  Peel  proclaimed  himself  an  absolute  convert  to 
the  Free-trade  principle,  and  that  the  introduction  of  the 
principle  into  all  departments  of  our  commercial  legisla- 
tion was,  according  to  his  intention,  to  be  a  mere  question 
of  time  and  convenience.  The  struggle  was  to  be  be- 
tween Protection  and  Free-trade. 

Not  that  the  proposals  of  the  ministry  wholly  satisfied 
the  professed  Free-traders.  These  latter  would  have 
enforced,  if  they  could,  an  immediate  application  of  the 
principle  without  the  interval  of  three  years,  and  the 
devices  and  shifts  which  were  to  be  put  in  operation  dur- 
ing that  middle  time.  But  of  course,  although  they  pressed 
their  protest  in  the  form  of  an  amendment,  they  had  no 
idea  of  not  taking  what  they  could  get  when  the  amend- 
ment failed  to  secure  the  approval  of  the  majority.  The 
Protectionist  amendment  amounted  to  a  distinct  proposal 
that  the  policy  of  the  Government  be  absolutely  rejected 
by  the  House.  The  debate  lasted  for  twelve  nights,  and 
at  the  end  the  Protectionists  had  240  votes  against  337 
given  on  behalf  of  the  policy  of  the  Government.  The 
majority  of  97  was  not  quite  so  large  as  the  Government 
had  anticipated;  and  the  result  was  to  encourage  the 
Protectionists  in  their  plans  of  opposition.  The  oppor- 
tunities of  obstruction  were  many.  The  majority  just 
mentioned  was  merely  in  favor  of  going  into  committee 


MR.  DISRAELI.  341 

of  the  whole  House  to  consider  the  existing  Customs  and 
Corn  Acts ;  but  every  single  financial  scheme  which  the 
minister  had  to  propose  must  be  introduced,  debated,  and 
carried,  if  it  was  to  be  carried,  as  a  separate  bill.  We  shall 
not  ask  our  readers  to  follow  us  into  the  details  of  these 
long  discussions.  They  were  not  important ;  they  were 
often  not  dignified.  They  more  frequently  concerned 
themselves  about  the  conduct  and  personal  consistency  of 
the  minister  than  about  the  merits  of  his  policy.  The 
arguments  in  favor  of  Protection,  which  doubtless  seemed 
effective  to  the  country  gentlemen  then,  seem  like  the 
prattle  of  children  now.  There  were,  indeed,  some  ex- 
citing passages  in  the  debates.  For  these  the  House  was 
mainly  indebted  to  the  rhetoric  of  Mr.  Disraeli.  That 
indefatigable  and  somewhat  reckless  champion  occupied 
himself  with  incessant  attacks  on  the  Prime-minister. 
He  described  Peel  as  "  a  trader  on  other  people's  intelli- 
X'  gence ;  a  political  burglar  of  other  men's  ideas. "  "  The 
occupants  of  the  Treasury  bench,"  he  said,  were  "  political 
peddlers,  who  had  bought  their  party  in  the  cheapest 
market  and  sold  it  in  the  dearest."  This  was  strong 
language.  But  it  was,  after  all,  more  justifiable  than  the 
attempt  Mr.  Disraeli  made  to  revive  an  old  and  bitter  con- 
troversy  between  Sir  Robert  Peel  and  Mr.  Cobden,  which, 
for  the  sake  of  the  former,  had  better  have  been  forgotten. 
Three  years  before,  Mr.  Edward  Drummond,  private  secre- 
tary of  Sir  Robert  Peel,  was  shot  by  an  assassin.  There 
could  be  no  doubt  that  the  victim  had  been  mistaken  for 
the  Prime-minister  himself.  The  assassin  turned  out  to 
be  a  lunatic,  and  as  such  was  found  not  guilty  of  the 
murder,  and  was  consigned  to  a  lunatic  asylum.  The 
event  naturally  had  a  profound  effect  on  Sir  Robert  Peel ; 
and  during  one  of  the  debates  on  Free-trade,  Mr.  Cobden 
happening  to  say  that  he  would  hold  the  Prime-minister 
responsible  for  the  condition  of  the  country,  Peel,  in  an 


342  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

extraordinary  burst  of  excitement,  interpreted  the  words 
as  a  threat  to  expose  him  to  the  attack  of  an  assassin. 
Nothing  could  be  more  painfully  absurd ;  and  nothing 
could  better  show  the  unreasoning  and  discreditable  hatred 
of  the  Tories  at  that  time  for  any  one  who  opposed  the 
policy  of  Peel,  than  the  fact  that  they  actually  cheered 
their  leader  again  and  again  when  he  made  this  passionate 
and  half-frenzied  charge  on  one  of  the  purest  and  noblest 
men  who  ever  sat  in  the  English  Parliament.  Peel  soon 
recovered  his  senses.  He  saw  the  error  of  which  he  had 
been  guilty,  and  regretted  it ;  and  it  ought  to  have  been 
consigned  to  forgetfulness  ;  but  Mr.  Disraeli,  in  repelling 
a  charge  made  against  him  of  indulging  in  unjustifiable 
personalities,  revived  the  whole  story,  and  reminded  the 
House  of  Commons  that  the  Prime-minister  had  charged 
the  leader  of  the  Free-trade  League  with  inciting  assassins 
to  murder  him.  This  unjustifiable  attempt  to  rekindle  an 
old  quarrel  had,  however,  no  other  effect  than  to  draw 
from  Sir  Robert  Peel  a  renewed  expression  of  apology  for 
the  charge  he  had  made  against  Mr.  Cobden,  "in  the 
course  of  a  heated  debate,  when  I  put  an  erroneous  con- 
struction on  some  expressions  used  by  the  honorable 
member  for  Stockport."  Mr.  Cobden  declared  that  the 
explanation  made  by  Peel  was  entirely  satisfactory,  and 
expressed  his  hope  that  no  one  on  either  side  of  the  House 
would  attempt  to  revive  the  subject  or  make  further  allu- 
sion to  it. 

The  Government  prevailed.  It  would  be  superfluous 
to  go  into  any  details  as  to  the  progress  of  the  Corn  Bill. 
Enough  to  say  that  the  third  reading  of  the  bill  passed 
the  House  of  Commons  on  May  15th,  by  a  majority  of  98 
votes.  The  bill  was  at  once  sent  up  to  the  House  of  Lords, 
and,  by  means  chiefly  of  the  earnest  advice  of  the  Duke 
of  Wellington,  was  carried  through  that  House  without 
much  serious  opposition.  But  June  25th,  the  day  when 


MR.  DISRAELI.  343 

the  bill  was  read  for  a  third  time  in  the  House  of  Lords, 
was  a  memorable  day  in  the  Parliamentary  annals  of 
England.  It  was  the  fall  of  the  ministry  who  had  carried 
to  success  the  greatest  piece  of  legislation  that  had  been 
introduced  since  Lord  Grey's  Reform  Bill. 

A  Coercion  Bill  for  Ireland  was  the  measure  which 
brought  this  catastrophe  on  the  Government  of  Sir  Robert 
Peel.  While  the  Corn  Bill  was  yet  passing  through  the 
House  of  Commons,  the  Government  felt  called  upon,  in 
consequence  of  the  condition  of  crime  and  outrage  in  Ire- 
land, to  introduce  a  Coercion  Bill.  Lord  George  Bentinck 
at  first  gave  the  measure  his  support ;  but  during  the 
Whitsuntide  recess  he  changed  his  views.  He  now  de- 
clared that  he  had  only  supported  the  bill  on  the  assur- 
ance of  the  Government  that  it  was  absolutely  necessary 
for  the  safety  of  life  in  Ireland,  and  that  as  the  Government 
had  not  pressed  it  on  in  advance  of  every  other  measure — 
especially,  no  doubt,  of  the  Corn  Bill — he  could  not  believe 
that  it  was  really  a  matter  of  imminent  necessity  ;  and 
that,  furthermore,  he  had  no  longer  any  confidence  in  the 
Government,  and  could  not  trust  them  with  extraor- 
dinary powers.  In  truth,  the  bill  was  placing  the  Govern- 
ment in  a  serious  difficulty.  All  the  Irish  followers  of 
O'Connell  would,  of  course,  oppose  the  coercion  measure. 
The  Whigs,  when  out  of  office,  have  usually  made  it  a 
rule  to  oppose  coercion  bills  if  they  do  not  come  accom- 
panied with  some  promises  of  legislative  reform  and  con- 
cession. The  English  Radical  members,  Mr.  Cobden  and 
his  followers,  were  almost  sure  to  oppose  it.  Under  these 
circumstances,  it  seemed  probable  enough  that  if  the 
Protectionists  joined  with  the  other  opponents  of  the 
Coercion  Bill,  the  Government  must  be  defeated.  The 
temptation  was  too  great.  As  Mr.  Disraeli  himself  can- 
didly says  of  his  party,  "  Vengeance  had  succeeded  in  most 
breasts  to  the  more  sanguine  sentiment.  The  field  was 


344  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

lost,  but  at  any  rate  there  should  be  retribution  for  those 
who  had  betrayed  it."  The  question  with  many  of  the 
indignant  Protectionists  was,  as  Mr.  Disraeli  himself  puts 
it,  "  How  was  Sir  Robert  Peel  to  be  turned  out  ? "  It 
soon  became  evident  that  he  could  be  turned  out  by  those 
who  detested  him  and  longed  for  vengeance  voting  against 
him  on  the  Coercion  Bill.  This  was  done.  The  fiercer 
Protectionists  voted  with  the  Free-traders,  the  Whigs, 
and  the  Irish  Catholic  and  Liberal  members,  and,  after  a 
debate  of  much  bitterness  and  passion,  the  division  on  the 
second  reading  of  the  Coercion  Bill  took  place  on  Thurs- 
day, June  25th,  and  the  ministry  were  left  in  a  minority 
of  73.  Two  hundred  and  nineteen  votes  only  were  given 
for  the  second  reading  of  the  bill,  and  292  against  it. 
Some  eighty  of  the  Protectionists  followed  Lord  George 
Bentinck  into  the  lobby  to  vote  against  the  bill,  and  their 
votes  settled  the  question.  Mr.  Disraeli  has  given  a  some- 
what pompous  description  of  the  scene  "  as  the  Protec- 
tionists passed  in  defile  before  the  minister  to  the  hostile 
lobby."  "  Pallas  te  hoc  vulnere,  Pallas  immolat"  cries 
the  hero  of  the  ^Eneid,  as  he  plunges  his  sword  into  the 
heart  of  his  rival.  "  Protection  kills  you  ;  not  your  Coer- 
cion Bill,"  the  irreconcilable  Protectionists  might  have 
said  as  they  trooped  past  the  ministry.  Chance  had  put 
within  their  grasp  the  means  of  vengeance,  and  they  had 
seized  it,  and  made  successful  use  of  it.  The  Peel  Min- 
istry had  fallen  in  its  very  hour  of  triumph. 

Three  days  after  Sir  Robert  Peel  announced  his  resigna- 
tion of  office.  His  speech  "  was  considered  one  of  glori- 
fication and  pique,"  says  Mr.  Disraeli.  It  does  not  so  im- 
press most  readers.  It  appears  to  have  been  full  of  dig- 
nity, and  of  emotion,  not  usual  with  Peel,  but  not  surely, 
under  the  circumstances,  incompatible  with  dignity.  It 
contained  that  often-quoted  tribute  to  the  services  of  a 
former  opponent,  in  which  Peel  declared  that  "  the  name 


MR.  DISEAELL  345 

which  ought  to  be  and  which  will  he  associated  with  the  suc- 
cess of  these  measures  is  the  name  of  the  man  who,  acting, 
I  believe,  from  pure  and  disinterested  motives,  has  advo- 
cated their  cause  with  untiring  energy,  and  with  appeals 
to  reason  enforced  by  an  eloquence  the  more  to  be  admired 
because  it  is  unaffected  and  unadorned — the  name  of 
Richard  Cobden."  An  added  effect  was  given  to  this  well- 
deserved  panegyric  by  the  little  irregularity  which  the 
Prime-minister  committed  when  he  mentioned  in  debate 
a  member  by  name.  The  closing  sentence  of  the  speech 
was  eloquent  and  touching.  Many  would  censure  him, 
Peel  said  ;  his  name  would  perhaps  be  execrated  by  the 
monopolist,  who  would  maintain  protection  for  his  own 
individual  benefit ;  "  but  it  may  be  that  I  shall  leave  a 
name  sometimes  remembered  with  expressions  of  good- 
will in  those  places  which  are  the  abode  of  men  whose  lot 
it  is  to  labor  and  to  earn  their  daily  bread  by  the  sweat  of 
their  brow — a  name  remembered  with  expressions  of  good- 
will when  they  shall  recreate  their  exhausted  strength 
with  abundant  and  untaxed  food,  the  sweeter  because  it  is 
no  longer  leavened  with  a  sense  of  injustice." 

The  great  minister  fell.  So  great  a  success  followed  by 
so  sudden  and  complete  a  fall  is  hardly  recorded  in  the 
Parliamentary  history  of  our  modern  times.  Peel  had 
crushed  O'Connell  and  carried  Free-trade,  and  O'Connell 
and  the  Protectionists  had  life  enough  yet  to  pull  him 
down.  He  is  as  a  conqueror  who,  having  won  the  great 
victory  of  his  life,  is  struck  by  a  hostile  hand  hi  some  by- 
way as  he  passes  home  to  enjoy  his  triumph. 

' 


340  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 


CHAPTER  XVII. 

FAMINE,  COMMERCIAL  TROUBLE,  AND  FOREIGN  INTRIGUE. 

LORD  JOHN  RUSSELL  succeeded  Sir  Robert  Peel  as  First 
Lord  of  the  Treasury ;  Lord  Palmerston  became  Foreign 
Secretary ;  Sir  Charles  Wood  was  Chancellor  of  the  Ex- 
chequer ;  Lord  Grey  took  charge  of  the  Colonies  ;  and  Sir 
George  Grey  was  Home  Secretary.  Mr.  Macaulay  accepted 
the  office  of  Paymaster-general,  with  a  seat  in  the  cabinet, 
a  distinction  not  usually  given  to  the  occupant  of  that 
office.  The  ministry  was  not  particularly  strong  in  ad- 
ministrative talent.  The  Premier  and  the  Foreign  Secre- 
tary were  the  only  members  of  the  cabinet  who  could  be 
called  statesmen  of  the  first  class  ;  and  even  Lord  Palm- 
erston had  not  as  yet  won  more  than  a  somewhat  doubt- 
ful kind  of  fame,  and  was  looked  upon  as  a  man  quite  as 
likely  to  do  mischief  as  good  to  any  ministry  of  which  he 
might  happen  to  form  a  part.  Lord  Grey  then  and  since 
only  succeeded  somehow  in  missing  the  career  of  a  lead- 
ing statesman.  He  had  great  talents  and  some  origi- 
nality ;  he  was  independent  and  bold.  But  his  independ- 
ence degenerated  too  often  into  impracticability  and  even 
eccentricity ;  and  he  was,  in  fact,  a  politician  with  whom 
ordinary  men  could  not  work.  Sir  Charles  Wood,  the 
new  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  had  solid  sense  and  ex- 
cellent administrative  capacity,  but  he  was  about  as  bad 
a  public  speaker  as  ever  addressed  the  House  of  Commons. 
His  budget  speeches  were  often  made  so  unintelligible  by 


FAMINE,  COMMERCIAL  TROUBLE,  ETC.  347 

defective  manner  and  delivery  that  they  might  almost  as 
well  have  been  spoken  in  a  foreign  language.  Sir  George 
Grey  was  a  speaker  of  fearful  fluency,  and  a  respectable 
administrator  of  the  second  or  third  class.  He  was  as 
plodding  in  administration  as  he  was  precipitate  of  speech. 

"  Peel,"  wrote  Lord  Palmerston.  to  a  friend  a  short  time 
after  the  formation  of  the  new  ministry,  "  seems  to  have 
made  up  his  mind  that  for  a  year  or  two  he  cannot  hope 
to  form  a  party,  and  that  he  must  give  people  a  certain 
time  to  forget  the  events  of  last  year ;  in  the  mean  while, 
it  is  evident  that  he  does  not  wish  that  any  other  Govern- 
ment should  be  formed  out  of  the  people  on  his  side  of  the 
House,  because  of  that  Government  he  would  not  be  a 
member.  For  these  reasons,  and  also  because  he  sincerely 
thinks  it  best  that  we  should,  for  the  present,  remain  in, 
he  gives  us  very  cordial  support,  as  far  as  he  can,  without 
losing  his  independent  position.  Graham,  who  sits  up 
under  his  old  pillar,  and  never  comes  down  to  Peel's  bench 
even  for  personal  communication,  seems  to  keep  himself 
aloof  from  everybody,  and  to  hold  himself  free  to  act  ac- 
cording to  circumstances  ;  but  as  yet  he  is  not  considered 
as  the  head  of  any  party.  George  Bentinck  has  entirely 
broken  down  as  a  candidate  for  ministerial  position ;  and 
thus  we  are  left  masters  of  the  field,  not  only  on  account 
of  our  own  merits,  which,  though  we  say  it  ourselves,  are 
great,  but  by  virtue  of  the  absence  of  any  efficient  compet- 
itors." Palmerston's  humorous  estimate  of  the  state  of 
affairs  was  accurate.  The  new  ministry  was  safe  enough, 
because  there  was  no  party  in  a  condition  to  compete 
with  it. 

The  position  of  the  Government  of  Lord  John  Russell 
was  not  one  to  be  envied.  The  Irish  famine  occupied  all 
attention,  and  soon  seemed  to  be  an  evil  too  great  for  any 
ministry  to  deal  with.  The  failure  of  the  potato  was  an 
overwhelming  disaster  for  a  people  almost  wholly  agri- 


348  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

cultural  and  a  peasantry  long  accustomed  to  live  upon 
that  root  alone.  Ireland  contains  very  few  large  towns ; 
when  the  names  of  four  or  five  are  mentioned  the  list  is 
done  with,  and  we  have  to  come  to  mere  villages.  The 
country  has  hardly  any  manufactures  except  that  of  linen 
in  the  northern  province.  In  the  south  and  west  the 
people  live  by  agriculture  alone.  The  cottier  system, 
which  prevailed  almost  universally  in  three  of  the  four 
provinces,  was  an  arrangement  by  which  a  man  obtained 
in  return  for  his  labor  a  right  to  cultivate  a  little  patch 
of  ground,  just  enough  to  supply  him  with  food  for  the 
scanty  maintenance  of  his  family.  The  great  landlords 
were  for  the  most  part  absentees ;  the  smaller  landlords 
were  often  deeply  in  debt,  and  were,  therefore,  compelled 
to  screw  every  possible  penny  of  rent  out  of  their  tenants- 
at-will.  They  had  not,  however,  even  that  regularity  and 
order  in  their  exactions  that  might  at  least  have  forced 
upon  the  tenants  some  habits  of  forethought  and  exact- 
ness. There  was  a  sort  of  understanding  that  the  rent 
was  always  to  be  somewhat  in  arrear ;  the  supposed  kind- 
ness of  a  landlord  consisted  in  his  allowing  the  indebted- 
ness to  increase  more  liberally  than  others  of  his  class 
would  do.  There  was  a  demoralizing  slatternliness  in 
the  whole  system.  It  was  almost  certain  that  if  a  tenant, 
by  greatly  increased  industry  and  good  fortune,  made  the 
land  which  he  held  more  valuable  than  before,  his  rent 
would  at  once  be  increased.  On  the  other  hand,  it  was 
held  an  act  of  tyranny  to  dispossess  him  so  long  as  he 
made  even  any  fair  promise  of  paying  up.  There  was, 
therefore,  a  thoroughly  vicious  system  established  all 
round,  demoralizing  alike  to  the  landlord  and  the  tenant. 
Underlying  all  the  relations  of  landlord  and  tenant  hi 
Ireland  were  two  great  facts.  The  occupation  of  land  was 
virtually  a  necessity  of  life  to  the  Irish  tenant.  That  is 
the  first  fact.  The  second  is  that  the  land  system  under 


FAMINE,  COMMERCIAL  TROUBLE,  ETC.  349 

which  Ireland  was  placed  was  one  entirely  foreign  to  the 
traditions,  the  ideas,  one  might  say  the  very  genius,  of  the 
Irish  people.  Whether  the  system  introduced  by  con- 
quest and  confiscation  was  better  than  the  old  one  or  not 
does  not  in  the  slightest  degree  affect  the  working  of  this 
fact  on  the  relations  between  the  landlord  and  the  tenant 
in  Ireland.  No  one  will  be  able  to  understand  the  whole 
meaning  and  bearing  of  the  long  land  struggle  in  Ireland 
who  does  not  clearly  get  into  his  mind  the  fact  that, 
rightly  or  wrongly,  the  Irish  peasant  regarded  the  right 
to  have  a  bit  of  land,  his  share,  exactly  as  other  peoples 
regard  the  right  to  live.  It  was  in  his  mind  something 
elementary  and  self-evident.  He  could  not  be  loyal  to,  he 
could  not  even  understand,  any  system  which  did  not 
secure  that  to  him.  According  to  Michelet,  the  land  is 
the  French  peasant's  mistress.  It  was  the  Irish  peasant's 
life. 

The  Irish  peasant,  with  his  wife  and  his  family,  lived 
on  the  potato.  Hardly  in  any  country  coming  within 
the  pale  of  civilization  was  there  to  be  found  a  whole 
peasant  population  dependent  for  their  living  on  one 
single  root.  When  the  potato  failed  in  1845  the  life- 
system  of  the  people  seemed  to  have  given  way.  At  first 
it  was  not  thought  that  the  failure  must  necessarily  be 
anything  more  than  partial.  But  it  soon  began  to  appear 
that  for  at  least  two  seasons  the  whole  food  of  the  peasant 
population  and  of  the  poor  in  towns  was  absolutely  gone. 
Lord  John  Russell's  Government  pottered  with  the  diffi- 
culty rather  than  encountered  it.  In  their  excuse  it  has 
to  be  said,  of  course,  that  the  calamity  they  had  to  meet 
was  unprecedented,  and  that  it  must  have  tried  the 
resources  of  the  most  energetic  and  foreseeing  statesman- 
ship. Still,  the  fact  remains  that  the  measures  of  the 
Government  were  at  first  utterly  inadequate  to  the  occa- 
sion, and  that  afterward  some  of  them  were  even  calcu- 


350  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

lated  to  make  bad  worse.  Not  a  county  in  Ireland  wholly 
escaped  the  potato  disease,  and  many  of  the  southern  and 
western  counties  were  soon  in  actual  famine.  A  peculiar 
form  of  fever — famine-fever  it  was  called — began  to  show 
itself  everywhere.  A  terrible  dysentery  set  in  as  well. 
In  some  districts  the  people  died  in  hundreds  daily  from 
fever,  dysentery,  or  sheer  starvation.  The  districts  of 
Skibbereen,  Skull,  Westport,  and  other  places  obtained  a 
ghastly  supremacy  in  misery.  In  some  of  these  districts 
the  parochial  authorities  at  last  declined  to  put  the  rate- 
payers to  the  expense  of  coffins  for  the  too  frequent  dead. 
The  coroners  declared  it  impossible  to  keep  on  holding 
inquests.  There  was  no  time  for  all  the  ceremonies  of 
that  kind  that  would  have  to  be  gone  through  if  they 
made  any  pretence  at  keeping  up  the  system  of  ordinary 
seasons.  In  other  places  where  the  formula  was  still  kept 
up  the  juries  added  to  their  verdicts  of  death  by  starva- 
tion some  charge  of  wilful  murder  against  Lord  John  Rus- 
sell, or  the  Lord-lieutenant,  or  some  other  official  whose 
supposed  neglect  was  set  down  as  the  cause  of  the  death. 
Unfortunately  the  Government  had  to  show  an  immense 
activity  in  the  introduction  of  coercion  bills  and  other 
repressive  measures.  It  would  have  been  impossible  that 
in  such  a  country  as  Ireland  a  famine  of  that  gigantic 
kind  should  set  in  without  bringing  crimes  of  violence 
along  with  it.  The  peasantry  had  always  hated  the  land 
tenure  system;  they  had  always  been  told,  not  surely 
without  justice,  that  it  was  at  the  bottom  of  all  their 
miseries ;  they  were  now  under  the  firm  conviction  that 
the  Government  could  have  saved  them  if  it  would. 
"What  wonder,  then,  if  there  were  bread  riots  and  agra- 
rian disturbances  ?  Who  can  now  wonder,  that  being  so, 
that  the  Government  introduced  exceptional  measures  of 
repression  ?  But  it  certainly  had  a  grim  and  a  disheart- 
ening effect  on  the  spirits  of  the  Irish  people  when  it 


FAMINE,  COMMERCIAL  TROUBLE,  ETC.  351 

seemed  as  if  the  Government  could  only  potter  and  palter 
with  famine,  but  could  be  earnest  and  energetic  when 
devising  coercion  bills. 

Whatever  might  be  said  of  the  Government,  no  one  could 
doubt  the  good- will  of  the  English  people.  In  every  great 
English  community,  from  the  metropolis  downward,  sub- 
scription lists  were  opened,  and  the  most  liberal  contribu- 
tions poured  in.  In  Liverpool,  for  example,  a  great  num- 
ber of  the  merchants  of  the  place  put  down  a  thousand 
pounds  each.  The  Quakers  of  England  sent  over  a  dele- 
gation of  their  number  to  the  specially  famine-stricken 
districts  of  Ireland  to  administer  relief.  Many  other  sects 
and  bodies  followed  the  example.  National  Relief  Asso- 
ciations were  specially  formed  in  England.  Relief,  indeed, 
began  to  be  poured  in  from  all  countries.  The  United 
States  employed  some  of  their  war  vessels  to  send  gifts  of 
grain  and  other  food  to  the  starving  places.  In  one  Irish 
seaport  the  joybells  of  the  town  were  kept  ringing  all  day 
in  honor  of  the  arrival  of  one  of  these  grain-laden  vessels 
— a  mournfully  significant  form  of  rejoicing,  surely.  One 
of  the  national  writers  said  at  the  time  that  the  misery  of 
Ireland  touched  "  even  the  heart  of  the  Turk  at  the  far 
Dardanelles,  and  he  sent  her  in  pity  the  alms  of  a  beggar." 
It  was  true  that  from  Turkey,  as  from  most  other  coun- 
tries, had  come  some  contribution  toward  the  relief  of 
Irish  distress.  At  the  same  time  there  were  some  very 
foolish  performances  gone  through  in  Dublin  under  the 
sanction  and  patronage  of  the  Lord-lieutenant — the  solemn 
"  inauguration, "  as  it  would  be  called  by  a  certain  class 
of  writers  now,  of  a  public  soup-kitchen,  devised  and  man- 
aged by  the  fashionable  French  cook,  M.  Soyer,  for  the 
purpose  of  showing  the  Irish  people  what  remarkably  sus- 
taining potage  might  be  made  out  of  the  thinnest  and 
cheapest  materials.  This  exposition  would  have  been  well 
enough  in  a  quiet  and  practical  way,  but  performed  as  a 


352  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

grand  national  ceremony  of  regeneration,  under  the  patron- 
age of  the  Viceroy,  and  with  accompaniment  of  brass- 
bands  and  pageantry,  it  had  a  remarkably  foolish  and 
even  offensive  aspect.  The  performance  was  resented 
bitterly  by  many  of  the  impatient  young  spirits  of  the 
national  party  in  Dublin. 

Meanwhile  the  misery  went  on  deepening  and  broaden- 
ing. It  was  far  too  great  to  be  effectually  encountered  by 
subscriptions,  however  generous;  and  the  Government, 
meaning  to  do  the  best  they  could,  were  practically  at 
their  wits'  end.  The  starving  peasants  streamed  into  the 
nearest  considerable  town  hoping  for  relief  there,  arid 
found  too  often  that  there  the  very  sources  of  charity 
were  dried  up.  Many,  very  many,  thus  disappointed, 
merely  lay  down  on  the  pavement  and  died  there.  Along 
the  country  roads  one  met  everywhere  groups  of  gaunt, 
dim-eyed  wretches  clad  in  miserable  old  sacking,  and 
wandering  aimlessly  with  some  vague  idea  of  finding  food, 
as  the  boy  in  the  fable  hoped  to  find  the  gold  where  the 
rainbow  touched  the  earth.  Many  remained  in  their 
empty  hovels,  and  took  death  there  when  he  came.  In 
some  regions  the  country  seemed  unpeopled  for  miles.  A 
fervid  national  writer  declared  that  the  impression  made 
on  him  by  the  aspect  of  the  country  then  was  that  of  "  one 
silent,  vast  dissolution."  Allowing  for  rhetoric,  there  was 
not  much  exaggeration  in  the  words.  Certainly  the  Ire- 
land of  tradition  was  dissolved  in  the  operation  of  that 
famine.  The  old  system  gave  way  utterly.  The  landlord- 
ism of  the  days  before  the  famine  never  revived  in  its 
former  strength  and  its  peculiar  ways.  For  the  landlord 
class  there  came  out  of  the  famine  the  Encumbered  Es- 
tates Court ;  for  the  small  farmer  and  peasant  class  there 
floated  up  the  American  emigrant  ship. 

Acts  and  even  conspiracies  of  violence,  as  we  have  said, 
began  to  be  not  uncommon  throughout  the  country  and 


FAMINE,  COMMERCIAL  TROUBLE,  ETC.  353 

in  the  cities.  One  peculiar  symptom  of  the  time  was  the 
glass-breaking  mania  that  set  in  throughout  the  towns  of 
the  south  and  west.  It  is,  perhaps,  not  quite  reasonable 
to  call  it  a  mania,  for  it  had  melancholy  method  in  it. 
The  workhouses  were  overcrowded,  and  the  authorities 
could  not  receive  there  or  feed  there  one-fourth  of  the 
applicants  who  besieged  them.  Suddenly  it  seemed  to 
occur  to  the  minds  of  many  of  famine's  victims  that  there 
were  the  prisons  for  which  one  might  qualify  himself,  and 
to  which,  after  qualification,  he  could  not  be  denied  admit- 
tance. The  idea  was  simple  :  go  into  a  town,  smash 
deliberately  the  windows  of  a  shop,  and  some  days  of  a 
jail  and  of  substantial  food  must  follow.  The  plan  became 
a  favorite.  Especially  was  it  adopted  by  young  girls  and 
women.  After  a  time  the  puzzled  magistrates  resolved 
to  put  an  end  to  this  device  by  refusing  to  inflict  the  pun- 
ishment which  these  unfortunate  creatures  sought  as  a 
refuge  and  a  comfort.  One  early  result  of  the  famine  and 
the  general  breakdown  of  property  is  too  significant  to  be 
allowed  to  pass  unnoticed.  Some  of  the  landlords  had 
been  living  for  a  long  time  on  a  baseless  system,  on  a  credit 
which  the  failure  of  the  crops  brought  to  a  crushing  test. 
Not  a  few  of  these  were  utterly  broken.  They  could 
maintain  their  houses  and  halls  no  longer,  and  often  were 
only  too  happy  to  let  them  to  the  poor-law  guardians  to 
be  used  as  extra  workhouses.  In  the  near  neighborhood 
of  many  a  distressed  country  town  the  great  house  of  the 
local  magnate  thus  became  a  receptacle  for  the  pauper- 
ism which  could  not  find  a  refuge  in  the  overcrowded 
asylums  which  the  poor-law  system  had  already  provided. 
The  lion  and  the  lizard,  says  the  Persian  poet,  keep  the 
halls  where  Jamshyd  gloried  and  drank  deep.  The  pauper 
devoured  his  scanty  dole  of  Indian  meal  porridge  in  the 
hall  where  his  landlord  had  gloried  and  drunk  deep. 
When  the  famine  was  over  and  its  results  came  to  be 


354  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

estimated,  it  was  found  that  Ireland  had  lost  about  two 
millions  of  her  population.  She  had  come  down  from 
eight  millions  to  six.  This  was  the  combined  effect  of 
starvation,  of  the  various  diseases  that  followed  in  its  path 
gleaning  where  it  had  failed  to  gather,  and  of  emigration. 
Long  after  all  the  direct  effects  of  the  failure  of  the  potato 
had  ceased,  the  population  still  continued  steadily  to 
decrease.  The  Irish  peasant  had  in  fact  had  his  eyes 
turned,  as  Mr.  Bright  afterward  expressed  it,  toward  the 
setting  sun,  and  for  long  years  the  stream  of  emigration 
westward  never  abated  in  its  volume.  A  new  Ireland 
began  to  grow  up  across  the  Atlantic.  In  every  great  city 
of  the  United  States  the  Irish  element  began  to  form  a 
considerable  constituent  of  the  population.  From  New 
York  to  San  Francisco,  from  St.  Paul,  Minnesota,  to  New 
Orleans,  the  Irish  accent  is  heard  in  every  street,  and  the 
Irish  voter  comes  to  the  polling-booth  ready,  far  too  heed- 
lessly, to  vote  for  any  politician  who  will  tell  him  that 
America  loves  the  green  flag  and  hates  the  Saxon. 

Terrible  as  the  immediate  effects  of  the  famine  were,  it 
is  impossible  for  any  friend  of  Ireland  to  say  that,  on  the 
whole,  it  did  not  bring  much  good  with  it.  It  first  applied 
the  scourge  which  was  to  drive  out  of  the  land  a  thoroughly 
vicious  and  rotten  system.  It  first  called  the  attention  of 
English  statesmen  irresistibly  to  the  fact  that  the  system 
was  bad  to  its  heart's  core,  and  that  nothing  good  could 
come  of  it.  It  roused  the  attention  of  the  humble  Irish- 
man, too  often  inclined  to  put  up  with  everything  in  the 
lazy  spirit  of  a  Neapolitan  or  a  fatalist,  to  the  fact  that 
there  was  for  him  too  a  world  elsewhere.  The  famine 
had,  indeed  many  a  bloody  after-birth,  but  it  gave  to  the 
world  a  new  Ireland. 

The  Government,  as  it  may  be  supposed,  had  hard  work 
to  do  all  this  time.  They  had  the  best  intentions  toward 
Ireland,  and  were  always,  indeed,  announcing  that  they 


FAMINE,  COMMERCIAL  TROUBLE,  ETC.  355 

had  found  out  some  new  way  of  dealing  with  the  distress, 
and  modifying  or  withdrawing  old  plans.  They  adopted 
measures  from  time  to  time  to  expend  large  sums  in  some- 
thing like  systematic  employment  for  the  poor  in  Ireland ; 
they  modified  the  Irish  Poor-laws ;  they  agreed  at  length 
to  suspend  temporarily  the  Corn-laws  and  the  Navigation 
Laws,  so  far  as  these  related  to  the  importation  of  grain. 
A  tremendous  commercial  panic,  causing  the  fall  of  great 
houses,  especially  in  the  corn  trade,  all  over  the  country, 
called  for  the  suspension  of  the  Bank  Charter  Act  of  1844, 
and  the  measures  of  the  ministers  were,  for  the  most  part, 
treated  considerately  and  loyally  by  Sir  Robert  Peel ;  but 
a  new  opposition  had  formed  itself  under  the  nominal 
guidance  of  Lord  George  Bentinck,  and  the  real  inspiration 
of  Mr.  Disraeli.  Lord  George  Bentinck  brought  in  a  bill 
to  make  a  grant  of  sixteen  millions  to  be  expended  as  an 
advance  on  the  construction  and  completion  of  Irish  rail- 
ways. This  proposal  was  naturally  very  welcome  to 
many  in  Ireland.  It  had  a  lavish  and  showy  air  about 
it ;  and  Lord  George  Bentinck  talked  grandiosely  in  his 
speech  about  the  readiness  with  which  he,  the  Saxon, 
would,  if  his  measure  were  carried,  answer  with  his  head 
for  the  loyalty  of  the  Irish  people.  But  it  soon  began  to 
appear  that  the  scheme  was  not  so  much  a  question  of  the 
Irish  people  as  of  certain  moneyed  classes  who  might  be 
helped  along  at  the  expense  of  the  English  and  the  Irish 
people.  Lord  George  Bentinck  certainly  had  no  other 
than  a  direct  and  single-minded  purpose  to  do  good  to 
Ireland ;  but  his  measure  would  have  been  a  failure  if  it 
had  been  carried.  It  was  fairly  open  in  some  respects  to 
the  criticism  of  Mr.  Roebuck,  that  it  proposed  to  relieve 
Irish  landlordism  of  its  responsibilities  at  the  expense  of 
the  British  tax-payer.  The  measure  was  rejected.  Lord 
George  Bentinck  was  able  to  worry  the  ministry  some- 
what effectively  when  they  introduced  a  measure  to  reduce 


356  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

gradually  the  differential  duties  on  sugar  for  a  few  years, 
and  then  replace  these  duties  by  a  fixed  and  uniform  rate. 
This  was,  in  short,  a  proposal  to  apply  the  principle  of 
Free-trade,  instead  of  that  of  Protection,  to  sugar.  The 
protective  principle  had,  in  this  case,  however,  a  certain 
fascination  about  it,  even  for  independent  minds ;  for  an 
exceptional  protection  had  been  retained  by  Sir  Robert 
Peel  in  order  to  enable  the  planters  in  our  colonies  to 
compensate  themselves  for  the  loss  they  might  suffer  in 
the  transition  from  slavery  to  free  labor.  Lord  George 
Bentinck,  therefore,  proposed  an  amendment  to  the  reso- 
lutions of  the  Government,  declaring  it  unjust  and  impol- 
itic to  reduce  the  duty  on  foreign  slave-grown  sugar,  as 
tending  to  check  the  advance  of  production  by  British 
free  labor,  and  to  give  a  great  additional  stimulus  to  slave 
labor.  Many  sincere  and  independent  opponents  of 
slavery,  Lord  Brougham  in  the  House  of  Lords  among 
them,  were  caught  by  this  view  of  the  question.  Lord 
George  and  his  brilliant  lieutenant  at  one  time  appeared 
as  if  they  were  likely  to  carry  their  point  in  the  Commons. 
But  it  was  announced  that  if  the  resolutions  of  the  Govern- 
ment were  defeated  ministers  would  resign,  and  there 
was  no  one  to  take  their  place.  Peel  could  no.t  return  to 
power ;  and  the  time  was  far  distant  yet  when  Mr.  Dis- 
raeli could  form  a  ministry.  The  opposition  crumbled 
away,  therefore,  and  the  Government  measures  were 
carried.  Lord  George  Bentinck  made  himself  for  awhile 
the  champion  of  the  West  India  sugar-producing  interest. 
He  was  a  man  who  threw  himself  with  enormous  energy 
into  any  work  he  -undertook ;  and  he  had  got  up  the  case 
of  the  West  India  planters  with  all  the  enthusiasm  that 
inspired  him  hi  his  more  congenial  pursuits  as  one  of  the 
principal  men  on  the  turf.  The  alliance  between  him  and 
Mr.  Disraeli  is  curious.  The  two  men,  one  would  think, 
could  have  had  absolutely  nothing  in  common.  Mr. 


FAMINE,  COMMERCIAL  TROUBLE,  ETC.  357 

Disraeli  knew  nothing  about  horses  and  racing.  Lord 
George  Bentinck  could  not  possibly  have  understood,  not 
to  say  sympathized  with,  many  of  the  leading  ideas  of  his 
lieutenant.  Yet  Bentinck  had  evidently  formed  a  just 
estimate  of  Disraeli's  political  genius ;  and  Disraeli  saw 
that  in  Bentinck  were  many  of  the  special  qualities  which 
go  to  make  a  powerful  party  leader  in  England.  Time 
has  amply  justified,  and  more  than  justified,  Bentinck's 
convictions  as  to  Disraeli;  Bentinck's  premature  death 
leaves  Disraeli's  estimate  of  him  an  untested  speculation. 
There  were  troubles  abroad  as  well  as  at  home  for  the 
Government.  Almost  immediately  on  their  coming  into 
office,  the  project  of  the  Spanish  marriages,  concocted 
between  King  Louis  Philippe  and  his  minister,  M.  Guizot, 
disturbed  for  a  time,  and  very  seriously,  the  good  under- 
standing between  England  and  France.  It  might,  so  far 
as  this  country  was  concerned,  have  had  much  graver 
consequences,  but  for  the  fact  that  it  bore  its  bitter  fruit 
so  soon  for  the  dynasty  of  Louis  Philippe,  and  helped  to 
put  a  new  ruler  on  the  throne  of  France.  It  is  only  as  it 
affected  the  friendly  feeling  between  this  country  and 
France  that  the  question  of  the  Spanish  marriages  has  a 
place  in  such  a  work  as  this ;  but  at  one  time  it  seemed 
likely  enough  to  bring  about  consequences  which  would  link 
it  closely  and  directly  with  the  history  of  England.  The 
ambition  of  the  French  minister  and  his  master  was  to 
bring  the  throne  of  Spain  in  some  way  under  the  direct  in- 
fluence of  France.  Such  a  scheme  had  again  and  again  been 
at  the  heart  of  French  rulers  and  statesmen,  and  it  had 
always  failed.  At  least  it  had  always  brought  with  it 
jealousy,  hostility,  and  war.  Louis  Philippe  and  his 
minister  were  untaught  by  the  lessons  of  the  past.  The 
young  Queen  Isabella  of  Spain  was  unmarried,  and  of 
course  a  high  degree  of  public  anxiety  existed  in  Europe 
as  to  her  choice  of  a  husband.  No  delusion  can  be  more 


358  A  UISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

profound  or  more  often  exposed  than  that  which  inspires 
ambitious  princes  and  enterprising  statesmen  to  imagine 
that  they  can  control  nations  by  the  influence  of  dynastic 
alliances.  In  every  European  war  we  see  princes  closely 
connected  by  marriage  in  arms  against  each  other.  The 
great  political  forces  which  bring  nations  into  the  field  of 
battle  are  not  to  be  charmed  into  submission  by  the  rub- 
bing of  a  princess's  wedding-ring.  But  a  certain  class  of 
statesman,  a  man  of  the  order  who  in  ordinary  life  would 
be  called  too  clever  by  half,  is  always  intriguing  about 
royal  marriages,  as  if  thus  he  alone  could  hold  in  his 
hands  the  destinies  of  nations. 

In  an  evil  hour  for  themselves  and  their  fame,  Louis 
Philippe  and  his  minister  believed  that  they  could  obtain 
a  virtual  ownership  of  Spain  by  an  ingenious  marriage 
scheme.  There  was  at  one  time  a  project,  talked  of  rather 
than  actually  entertained,  of  marrying  the  young  Queen 
of  Spain  and  her  sister  to  the  Due  d'Aumale  and  the  Due 
de  Montpensier,  both  sons  of  Louis  Philippe.  But  this 
would  have  been  too  daring  a  venture  on  the  part  of  the 
King  of  the  French.  Apart  from  any  objections  to  be 
entertained  by  other  states,  it  was  certain  that  England 
could  not  "view  with  indifference,"  as  the  diplomatic 
phrase  goes,  the  prospect  of  a  son  of  the  French  King 
occupying  the  throne  of  Spain.  It  may  be  said  that  after 
all  it  was  of  little  concern  to  England  who  married  the 
Queen  of  Spain.  Spain  was  nothing  to  us.  It  would  not 
follow  that  Spam  must  be  the  tool  of  France  because 
the  Spanish  Queen  married  a  son  of  the  French  King,  any 
more  than  it  was  certain  in  a  former  day  that  Austria 
must  link  herself  with  the  fortunes  of  the  great  Napoleon 
because  he  had  married  an  Austrian  princess.  Probably 
it  would  have  been  well  if  England  had  concerned  herself 
in  nowise  with  the  domestic  affairs  of  Spain,  and  had 
allowed  Louis  Philippe  to  spin  what  ignoble  plots  he 


FAMINE,  COMMERCIAL  TROUBLE,  ETC.  359 

pleased,  if  the  Spanish  people  themselves  had  not  wit 
enough  to  see  through  and  power  enough  to  counteract 
them.  At  a  later  period  France  brought  on  herself  a 
terrible  war  and  a  crushing  defeat  because  her  Emperor 
chose  to  believe,  or  allowed  himself  to  be  persuaded  into 
believing,  that  the  security  of  France  would  be  threatened 
if  a  Prussian  prince  were  called  to  the  throne  of  Spain. 
The  Prussian  prince  did  not  ascend  that  throne ;  but  the 
war  between  France  and  Prussia  went  on ;  France  was 
defeated;  and  after  a  little  the  Spanish  people  themselves 
got  rid  of  the  prince  whom  they  had  consented  to  accept 
hi  place  of  the  obnoxious  Prussian.  If  the  French  Em- 
peror had  not  interfered,  it  is  only  too  probable  that  the 
Prussian  prince  would  have  gone  to  Madrid,  reigned  there 
for  a  few  unstable  and  tremulous  months,  and  then  have 
been  quietly  sent  back  to  his  own  countr}r.  But  at  the 
time  of  Louis  Philippe's  intrigues  about  the  Spanish 
marriages  the  statesmen  of  England  were  by  no  means 
disposed  to  take  a  cool  and  philosophic  view  of  things. 
The  idea  of  non-intervention  had  scarcely  come  up  then, 
and  the  English  minister  who  was  chiefly  concerned  in 
foreign  affairs  was  about  the  lust  man  in  the  world  to 
admit  that  anything  could  go  on  in  Europe  or  elsewhere 
in  which  England  was  not  entitled  to  express  an  opinion, 
and  to  make  her  influence  felt.  The  marriage,  therefore, 
of  the  young  Queen  of  Spain  had  been  long  a  subject  of 
anxious  consideration  in  the  councils  of  the  English 
Government.  Louis  Philippe  knew  very  well  that  he 
could  not  venture  to  marry  one  of  his  sons  to  the  young 
Isabella.  But  he  and  his  minister  devised  a  scheme  for 
securing  to  themselves  and  their  policy  the  same  effect  in 
another  way.  They  contrived  that  the  Queen  and  her 
sister  should  be  married  at  the  same  time — the  Queen  to 
her  cousin,  Don  Francisco  d'Assis,  Duke  of  Cadiz ;  and 
her  sister  to  the  Duke  de  Montpensier,  Louis  Philippe's 


360  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

son.  There  was  reason  to  expect  that  the  Queen,  if  mar- 
ried to  Don  Francisco,  would  have  no  children,  and  that 
the  wife  of  Louis  Philippe's  son,  or  some  of  her  children, 
would  come  to  the  throne  of  Spain. 

On  the  moral  guilt  of  a  plot  like  this  it  would  be  super- 
fluous to  dwell.  Nothing  in  the  history  of  the  perversions 
of  human  conscience  and  judgment  can  be  more  extraor- 
dinary than  the  fact  that  a  man  like  M.  Guizot  should  have 
been  its  inspiring  influence.  It  came  with  a  double  shock 
upon  the  Queen  of  England  and  her  ministers,  because 
they  had  every  reason  to  think  that  Louis  Philippe  had 
bound  himself  by  a  solemn  promise  to  discourage  any 
such  policy.  When  the  Queen  paid  her  visit  to  Louis 
Philippe  at  Eu,  the  King  made  the  most  distinct  and  the 
most  spontaneous  promise  on  the  subject  both  to  her 
Majesty  and  to  Lord  Aberdeen.  The  Queen's  own  journal 
says :  "  The  King  told  Lord  Aberdeen  as  well  as  me  he 
never  would  hear  of  Montpensier's  marriage  with  the 
Infanta  of  Spain — which  they  are  in  a  great  fright  about 
in  England — until  it  was  no  longer  a  political  question, 
which  would  be  when  the  Queen  is  married  and  has 
children."  The  King's  own  defence  of  himself  afterward, 
in  a  letter  intended  to  be  a  reply  to  one  written  to  his 
daughter,  the  Queen  of  the  Belgians,  by  Queen  Victoria, 
admits  the  fact.  "  I  shall  tell  you  precisely,"  he  says, 
«' in  what  consists  the  deviation  on  my  side.  Simply  in 
my  having  arranged  for  the  marriage  of  the  Due  de 
Montpensier,  not  before  the  marriage  of  the  Queen  of 
Spain,  for  she  is  to  be  married  to  the  Due  de  Cadiz  at 
the  very  moment  when  my  son  is  married  to  the  Infanta, 
but  before  the  Queen  has  a  child.  That  is  the  whole 
deviation,  nothing  more,  nothing  less."  This  was  surely 
deviation  enough  from  the  King's  promise  to  justify  any 
charge  of  bad  faith  that  could  be  made.  The  whole  ques- 
tion was  one  of  succession.  The  objection  of  England  and 


FAMINE,  COMMERCIAL  TROUBLE,  ETC.          361 

other  Powers  was,  from  first  to  last,  an  objection  to  any 
arrangement  which  might  leave  the  succession  to  one  of 
Louis  Philippe's  children  or  grand-children.  For  this 
reason  the  King  had  given  his  word  to  Queen  Victoria 
that  he  would  not  hear  of  his  son's  marriage  with  Isa- 
bella's sister  until  the  difficulty  about  the  succession  had 
been  removed  by  Isabella  herself  being  married  and  having 
a  child.  Such  an  agreement  was  absolutely  broken  when 
the  King  arranged  for  the  marriage  of  his  son  to  the 
sister  of  Queen  Isabella  at  the  same  time  as  Isabella's 
own  marriage,  and  when,  therefore,  it  was  not  certain 
that  the  young  Queen  would  have  any  children.  The 
political  question — the  question  of  succession — remained 
then  open  as  before.  All  the  objections  that  England 
and  other  Powers  had  to  the  marriage  of  the  Due  de 
Montpensier  stood  out  as  strong  as  ever.  It  was  a 
question  of  the  birth  of  a  child,  and  no  child  was  born. 
The  breach  of  faith  was  made  infinitely  more  grave  by 
the  fact  that  in  the  public  opinion  of  Europe,  Louis 
Philippe  was  set  down  as  having  brought  about  the 
marriage  of  the  Queen  of  Spain  with  her  cousin  Don 
Francisco  in  the  hope  and  belief  that  the  union  would  be 
barren  of  issue,  and  that  the  wife  of  his  son  would  stand 
on  the  next  step  of  the  throne. 

The  excuse  which  Louis  Philippe  put  forward  to  palliate 
what  he  called  his  "  deviation "  from  the  promise  to  the 
Queen  was  not  of  a  nature  calculated  to  allay  the  ill-feel- 
ing which  his  policy  had  aroused  in  England.  He  pleaded 
in  substance  that  he  had  reason  to  believe  in  an  intended 
piece  of  treachery  on  the  part  of  the  English  Govern- 
ment, the  consequences  of  which,  if  it  were  successful, 
would  have  been  injurious  to  his  policy,  and  the  discovery 
of  which,  therefore,  released  him  from  his  promise.  He 
had  found  out,  as  he  declared,  that  there  was  an  intention 
on  the  part  of  England  to  put  forward,  as  a  candidate  for 


SG2  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

the  hand  of  Queen  Isabella,  Prince  Leopold  of  Coburg, 
a  cousin  of  Prince  Albert.  There  was  so  little  justifica- 
tion for  any  such  suspicion  that  it  hardly  seemed  possible 
a  man  of  Louis  Philippe's  shrewdness  can  really  have 
entertained  it.  The  English  Government  had  always 
steadfastly  declined  to  give  any  support  whatever  to  the 
candidature  of  this  young  prince.  Lord  Aberdeen,  who 
was  then  Foreign  Secretary,  had  always  taken  his  stand 
on  the  broad  principle  that  the  marriage  of  the  Queen  of 
Spain  was  the  business  of  Isabella  herself  and  of  the 
Spanish  people ;  and  that  so'long  as  that  Queen  and  that 
people  were  satisfied,  and  the  interests  of  England  were 
in  nowise  involved,  the  Government  of  Queen  Victoria 
would  interfere  in  no  manner.  The  candidature  of 
Prince  Leopold  had  been,  in  the  first  instance,  a  project 
of  the  Dowager  Queen  of  Spain,  Christina,  a  woman  of 
intriguing  character,  on  whose  political  probity  no  great 
reliance  could  be  placed.  The  English  Government  had 
in  the  most  decided  and  practical  manner  proved  that 
they  took  no  share  in  the  plans  of  Queen  Christina,  and 
had  no  sympathy  with  them.  But  while  the  whole 
negotiations  were  going  on,  the  defeat  of  Sir  Robert 
Peel's  Ministry  brought  Lord  Palmerston  into  the  Foreign 
Office  in  place  of  Lord  Aberdeen.  The  very  name  of 
Palmerston  produced  on  Louis  Philippe  and  his  minister 
the  effect  vulgarly  said  to  be  wrought  on  a  bull  by  the 
display  of  a  red  rag.  Louis  Philippe  treasured  hi  bitter 
memory  the  unexpected  success  which  Palmerston  had 
won  from  him  in  regard  to  Turkey  and  Egypt.  At  that 
time,  and  especially  in  the  court  of  Louis  Philippe,  for- 
eign politics  were  looked  upon  as  the  field  in  which  the 
ministers  of  great  Powers  contended  against  each  other 
with  brag  and  trickery  and  subtle  arts  of  all  kinds ;  the 
plain  principles  of  integrity  and  truthful  dealing  did  not 
seem  to  be  regarded  as  properly  belonging  to  the  rules  of 


FAMINE,  COMMEECIAL  TROUBLE,  ETC.  363 

the  game.  Louis  Philippe  probably  believed  in  good  faith 
that  the  return  of  Lord  Palmerston  to  the  Foreign  Office 
must  mean  the  renewed  activity  of  treacherous  plans 
against  himself.  This,  at  least,  is  the  only  assumption 
on  which  we  can  explain  the  King's  conduct,  if  we  do  not 
wish  to  believe  that  he  put  forward  excuses  and  pretexts 
which  were  wilful  in  their  falsehood.  Louis  Philippe 
seized  on  some  words  in  a  despatch  of  Lord  Palmerston's, 
in  which  the  candidature  of  Prince  Leopold  was  simply 
mentioned  as  a  matter  of  fact ;  declared  that  these  words 
showed  that  the  English  Government  had  at  last  openly 
adopted  that  candidature,  professed  himself  relieved  from 
all  previous  engagements,  and  at  once  hurried  on  the 
marriage  between  Queen  Isabella  and  her  cousin,  and 
that  of  his  own  son  with  Isabella's  sister.  On  October 
10th,  1846,  the  double  marriage  took  place  at  Madrid;  and 
on  February  5th  following,  M.  Guizot  told  the  French 
Chambers  that  the  Spanish  marriages  constituted  the  first 
great  thing  France  had  accomplished  completely  single- 
handed  in  Europe  since  1830. 

Every  one  knows  what  a  failure  this  scheme  proved,  so 
far  as  the  objects  of  Louis  Philippe  and  his  minister  were 
concerned.  Queen  Isabella  had  children ;  JVIontpensier's 
wife  did  not  come  to  the  throne;  and  the  dynasty  of 
Louis  Philippe  fell  before  long,  its  fall  undoubtedly 
hastened  by  the  position  of  utter  isolation  and  distrust 
in  which  it  was  placed  by  the  scheme  of  the  Spanish 
marriages  and  the  feeling  which  it  provoked  in  Europe. 
The  fact  with  which  we  have  to  deal,  however,  is  that 
the  friendship  between  England  and  France,  from  which 
so  many  happy  results  seemed  likely  to  come  to  Europe 
and  the  cause  of  free  government,  was  necessarily  inter- 
rupted. It  would  have  been  impossible  to  trust  any 
longer  to  Louis  Philippe.  The  Queen  herself  entered  into 
a  correspondence  with  his  daughter,  the  Queen  of  the 


8G4  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES 

Belgians,  in  which  she  expressed  in  the  clearest  and  most 
emphatic  manner  her  opinion  of  the  treachery  with  which 
England  had  been  encountered,  and  suggested  plainly 
enough  her  sense  of  the  moral  wrong  involved  in  such 
ignoble  policy.  The  whole  transaction  is  but  another 
and  a  most  striking  condemnation  of  that  odious  creed, 
for  a  long  time  tolerated  in  state-craft,  that  there  is  one 
moral  code  for  private  life  and  another  for  the  world  of 
politics.  A  man  who  in  private  affairs  should  act  as 
Louis  Philippe  and  M.  Guizot  acted  would  be  justly  con- 
sidered infamous.  It  is  impossible  to  suppose  that  M. 
Guizot,  at  least,  could  have  so  acted  in  private  life.  M. 
Guizot  was  a  Protestant  of  a  peculiarly  austere  type,  who 
professed  to  make  religious  duty  his  guide  in  all  things, 
and  who  doubtless  did  make  it  so  .in  all  his  dealings  as  a 
private  citizen.  But  it  is  only  too  evident  that  he  believed 
the  policy  of  states  to  allow  of  other  principles  than  those 
of  Christian  morality.  He  allowed  himself  to  be  gov- 
erned by  the  odious  delusion  that  the  interests  of  a  state 
can  be  advanced  and  ought  to  be  pursued  by  means  which 
an  ordinary  man  of  decent  character  would  scorn  to  em- 
ploy for  any  object  in  private  life.  A  man  of  any  high 
principle  would  not  employ  such  arts  in  private  life  to 
save  all  his  earthly  possessions,  and  his  life  and  the  lives 
of  his  wife  and  children.  Any  one  who  will  take  the 
trouble  to  think  over  the  whole  of  this  plot — for  it  can  be 
called  by  no  other  name — over  the  ignoble  object  which 
it  had  in  view,  the  base  means  by  which  it  was  carried 
out,  the  ruthless  disregard  for  the  inclinations,  the  affec- 
tions, the  happiness,  and  the  morality  of  its  principal 
victims  ;  and  will  then  think  of  it  as  carried  on  in  private 
life  in  order  to  come  at  the  reversion  of  some  young  and 
helpless  girl's  inheritance,  will  perhaps  find  it  hard  to 
understand  how  the  shame  can  be  any  the  less  because 
the  principal  plotter  was  a  king,  and  the  victims  were  a 
queen  and  a  nation. 


CHARTISM  AND  YOUNG  IRELAND.  365 


CHAPTER  XVII. 

CHARTISM  AND  YOUNG  IRELAND. 

THE  year  1848  was  an  era  in  the  modern  history  of  Eu- 
rope. It  was  the  year  of  unfulfilled  revolution.  The  fall 
of  the  dynasty  of  Louis  Philippe  may  be  said  to  have  set 
the  revolutionary  tide  flowing.  The  event  in  France  had 
long  been  anticipated  by  keen-eyed  observers.  There  are 
many  predictions,  delivered  and  recorded  before  the  revo- 
lution was  yet  near,  which  show  that  it  ought  not  to  have 
taken  the  world  by  surprise.  The  reign  of  the  Bourgeois 
King  was  unsuited  in  its  good  and  in  its  bad  qualities 
alike  to  the  genius  and  the  temper  of  the  French  people. 
The  people  of  France  have  defects  enough  which  friends 
and  enemies  are  ready  to  point  out  to  them ;  but  it  can 
hardly  be  denied  that  they  like  at  least  the  appearance  of 
a  certain  splendor  and  magnanimity  in  their  systems  of 
government.  This  is,  indeed,  one  of  their  weaknesses. 
It  lays  them  open  to  the  allurements  of  any  brilliant 
adventurer,  like  the  First  Napoleon  or  the  Third,  who  can 
promise  them  national  greatness  and  glory  at  the  expense 
perhaps  of  domestic  liberty.  But  it  makes  them  peculi- 
arly intolerant  of  anything  mean  and  sordid  in  a  system 
or  a  ruler.  There  are  peoples,  no  doubt,  who  could  be 
persuaded,  and  wisely  persuaded,  to  put  up  with  a  good 
deal  of  the  ignoble  and  the  shabby  in  their  foreign  policy 
for  the  sake  of  domestic  comfort  and  tranquillity.  But 
the  French  people  are  always  impatient  of  anything  like 


36G  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

meanness  in  their  rulers,  and  the  government  of  Louis 
Philippe  was  especially  mean.  Its  foreign  policy  was 
treacherous  ;  its  diplomatists  were  commissioned  to  act 
as  tricksters  ;  the  word  of  a  French  minister  at  a  foreign 
court  began  to  be  regarded  as  on  a  level  of  credibility  with 
a  dicer's  oath.  The  home  policy  of  the  King  was  narrow- 
minded  and  repressive  enough  ;  but  a  man  who  played 
upon  the  national  weakness  more  wisely  might  have  per- 
suaded his  people  to  be  content  with  defects  at  home  for 
the  sake  of  prestige  abroad.  From  the  hour  when  it  be- 
came apparent  in  France  that  the  nation  was  not  respected 
abroad,  the  fall  of  the  dynasty  was  only  a  matter  of  time 
and  change.  The  terrible  story  of  the  De  Praslin  family 
helped  to  bring  about  the  catastrophe ;  the  alternate  weak- 
ness and  obstinacy  of  the  Government  forced  it  on  ;  and 
the  King's  own  lack  of  decision  made  it  impossible  that 
when  the  trial  had  come  it  could  end  in  any  way  but 
one. 

Louis  Philippe  fled  to  England,  and  his  flight  was  the 
signal  for  long  pent-up  fires  to  break  out  all  over  Europe. 
Revolution  soon  was  aflame  over  nearly  all  the  courts  and 
capitals  of  the  Continent.  Revolution  is  like  an  epidemic ; 
it  finds  out  the  weak  places  in  systems.  The  two  Euro- 
pean countries  which,  being  tried  by  it,  stood  it  best,  were 
England  and  Belgium.  In  the  latter  country  the  King 
made  frank  appeal  to  his  people,  and  told  them  that  if 
they  wished  to  be  rid  of  him  he  was  quite  willing  to  go. 
Language  of  this  kind  is  new  in  the  mouths  of  sovereigns ; 
and  the  Belgians  are  a  people  well  able  to  appreciate  it. 
They  declared  for  their  King,  and  the  shock  of  the  revolu- 
tion passed  harmlessly  away.  In  England  and  Ireland  the 
effect  of  the  events  in  France  was  instantly  made  man- 
ifest. The  Chartist  agitation  at  once  came  to  a  head. 
Some  of  the  Chartist  leaders  called  out  for  the  dismissal 
of  the  ministry,  the  dissolution  of  the  Parliament,  the 


CHARTISM  AND  YOUNG  IRELAND.  367 

Charter  and  "  no  surrender."  A  national  convention  of 
Chartists  began  its  sittings  in  London  to  arrange  for  a 
monster  demonstration  on  April  10th.  Some  of  the 
speakers  openly  declared  that  the  people  were  now  quite 
ready  to  fight  for  their  Charter.  Others,  more  cautious, 
advised  that  no  step  should  be  taken  against  the  law  until 
at  least  it  was  quite  certain  that  the  people  were  stronger 
than  the  upholders  of  the  existing  laws.  Nearly  all  the 
leading  Chartists  spoke  of  the  revolution  in  France  as  an 
example  offered  in  good  time  to  the  English  people  ;  and 
it  is  somewhat  curious  to  observe  how  it  was  assumed  in 
the  most  evident  good  faith  that  what  we  may  call  the 
wage-receiving  portion  of  the  population  of  these  islands 
constitutes  exclusively  the  English  people.  What  the 
educated,  the  wealthy,  the  owners  of  land,  the  proprietors, 
of  factories,  the  ministers  of  the  different  denominations, 
the  authors  of  books,  the  painters  of  pictures,  the  bench, 
the  bar,  the  army,  the  navy,  the  medical  profession — what 
all  these  or  any  of  them  might  think  with  regard  to  any 
proposed  constitutional  changes  was  accounted  a  matter 
in  nowise  affecting  the  resolve  of  the  English  "  people." 
The  moderate  men  among  the  Chartists  themselves  were 
soon  unable  to  secure  a  hearing  ;  and  the  word  of  order 
went  round  among  the  body,  that  "  the  English  people  " 
must  have  the  Charter  or  a  Republic.  What  had  been 
done  in  France  enthusiasts  fancied  might  well  be  done  in 
England. 

It  was  determined  to  present  a  monster  petition  to  the 
House  of  Commons  demanding  the  Charter,  and,  in  fact, 
offering  a  last  chance  to  Parliament  to  yield  quietly  to  the 
demand.  The  petition  was  to  be  presented  by  a  deputa- 
tion who  were  to  be  conducted  by  a  vast  procession  up  to 
the  doors  of  the  House.  The  procession  was  to  be  formed 
on  Kennington  Common,  the  space  then  unenclosed  which 
is  now  Kennington  Park,  on  the  south  side  of  London. 


368  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

There  the  Chartists  were  to  be  addressed  by  their  still 
trusted  leader,  Feargus  O'Connor,  and  they  were  to  march 
in  military  order  to  present  their  petition.  The  object 
undoubtedly  was  to  make  such  a  parade  of  physical  force 
as  should  overawe  the  Legislature  and  the  Government, 
and  demonstrate  the  impossibility  of  refusing  a  demand 
backed  by  such  a  reserve  of  power.  The  idea  was  taken 
from  O'Connell's  policy  in  the  monster  meetings ;  but 
there  were  many  of  the  Chartists  who  hoped  for  some- 
thing more  than  a  mere  demonstration  of  physical  force, 
and  who  would  have  been  heartily  glad  if  some  untimely 
or  unreasonable  interference  on  the  part  of  the  authorities 
had  led  to  a  collision.  A  strong  faith  still  survived  at 
that  day  in  what  was  grandiosely  called  the  might  of 
earnest  numbers.  Ardent  young  Chartists  who  belonged 
to  the  time  of  life  when  anything  seems  possible  to  the 
brave  and  faithful,  and  when  facts  and  examples  count 
for  nothing  unless  they  favor  one's  own  views,  fully 
believed  that  it  needed  but  the  firing  of  the  first  shot, 
"  the  sparkle  of  the  first  sword  drawn,"  to  give  success  to 
the  arms,  though  but  the  bare  arms,  of  the  people,  and  to 
inaugurate  the  reign  of  liberty.  Therefore,  however  dif- 
ferently and  harmlessly  events  may  have  turned  out,  we 
may  be  certain  that  there  went  to  the  rendezvous  at  Ken- 
nington  Common,  on  that  April  10th,  many  hundreds  of 
ignorant  and  excitable  young  men  who  desired  nothing  so 
much  as  a  collision  with  the  police  and  the  military,  and 
the  reign  of  liberty  to  follow.  The  proposed  procession 
was  declared  illegal,  and  all  peaceful  and  loyal  subjects 
were  warned  not  to  take  any  part  in  it.  But  this  was 
exactly  what  the  more  ardent  among  the  Chartists 
expected  and  desired  to  see.  They  were  rejoiced  that 
the  Government  had  proclaimed  the  procession  unlawful. 
Was  not  that  the  proper  occasion  for  resolute  patriots  to 
show  that  they  represented  a  cause  above  despotic  law  ? 


CHARTISM  AND  YOUNG  IRELAND.  3G9 

Was  not  that  the  very  opportunity  offered  to  them  to 
prove  that  the  people  were  more  mighty  than  their  rulers, 
and  that  the  rulers  must  obey  or  abdicate  ?  Was  not  the 
whole  sequence  of  proceedings  thus  far  exactly  after  the 
pattern  of  the  French  Revolution?  The  people  resolve 
that  they  will  have  a  certain  demonstration  in  a  certain 
way  ;  the  oligarchical  Government  declare  that  they  shall 
not  do  so ;  the  people  persevere,  and  of  course  the  next 
thing  must  be  that  the  Government  falls,  exactly  as  in 
Paris.  When  poor  Dick  Swiveller,  in  Dickens's  story,  is 
recovering  from  his  fever,  he  looks  forth  of  his  miserable 
bed  and  makes  up  his  mind  that  he  is  under  the  influence 
of  some  such  magic  spell  as  he  has  become  familiar  with 
in  the  "Arabian  Nights."  His  poverty-stricken  little 
nurse  claps  her  thin  hands  with  joy  to  see  him  alive ;  and 
Dick  makes  up  his  mind  that  the  clapping  of  the  hands  is 
the  sign  understood  of  all  who  read  Eastern  romance,  and 
that  next  must  appear  at  the  princess's  summons  the  row 
of  slaves  with  jars  of  jewels  on  their  heads.  Poor  Dick, 
reasoning  from  his  experiences  in  the  "  Arabian  Nights," 
was  not  one  whit  more  astray  than  enthusiastic  Chartists 
reasoning  for  the  sequence  of  English  politics  from  the 
evidence  of  what  had  happened  in  France.  The  slaves 
with  the  jars  of  jewels  on  their  heads  were  just  as  likely 
to  follow  the  clap  of  the  poor  girl's  hands,  as  the  events 
that  had  followed  a  popular  demonstration  in  Paris  to 
follow  a  popular  demonstration  in  London.  To  begin 
with,  the  Chartists  did  not  represent  any  such  power  in 
London  as  the  Liberal  deputies  of  the  French  Chamber 
did  in  Paris.  In  the  next  place,  London  does  not  govern 
England,  and  in  our  time,  at  least,  never  did.  In  the 
third  place,  the  English  Government  knew  perfectly  well 
that  they  were  strong  in  the  general  support  of  the  nation, 
and  were  not  likely  to  yield  for  a  single  moment  to  the 
hesitation  which  sealed  the  fate  of  the  French  monarchy. 

24 


370  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

The  Chartists  fell  to  disputing  among  themselves  very 
much  as  O'Connell's  Repealers  had  done.  Some  were  for 
disobeying  the  orders  of  the  authorities  and  having  the 
procession,  and  provoking  rather  than  avoiding  a  collision. 
At  a  meeting  of  the  Chartist  Convention  held  the  night 
before  the  demonstration,  "  the  eve  of  Liberty,"  as  some 
of  the  orators  eloquently  termed  it,  a  considerable  number 
were  for  going  armed  to  Kennington  Common.  Feargus 
O'Connor  had,  however,  sense  enough  still  left  to  throw 
the  weight  of  his  influence  against  such  an  insane  pro- 
ceeding, and  to  insist  that  the  demonstration  must  show 
itself  to  be,  as  it  was  from  the  first  proclaimed  to  be,  a 
strictly  pacific  proceeding.  This  was  the  parting  of  the 
ways  hi  the  Chartist  as  it  had  been  in  the  Repeal  agita- 
tion. The  more  ardent  spirits  at  once  withdrew  from  the 
organization.  Those  who  might  even  at  the  very  last  have 
done  mischief  if  they  had  remained  part  of  the  movement, 
withdrew  from  it ;  and  Chartism  was  left  to  be  represented 
by  an  open-air  meeting  and  a  petition  to  Parliament,  like 
all  the  other  demonstrations  that  the  metropolis  had  seen 
to  pass,  hardly  heeded,  across  the  field  of  politics.  But 
the  public  at  large  was  not  aware  that  the  fangs  of  Chart- 
ism had  been  drawn  before  it  was  let  loose  to  play  on 
Kennington  Common  that  memorable  10th  of  April. 
London  awoke  in  great  alarm  that  day.  The  Chartists 
in  their  most  sanguine  moments  never  ascribed  to  them- 
selves half  the  strength  that  honest  alarmists  of  the  bour- 
geois class  were  ready  that  morning  to  ascribe  to  them. 
The  wildest  rumors  were  spread  abroad  in  many  parts  of 
the  metropolis.  Long  before  the  Chartists  had  got  to- 
gether on  Kennington  Common  at  all,  various  remote 
quarters  of  London  were  filled  with  horrifying  reports  of 
encounters  between  the  insurgents  and  the  police  or  the 
military,  in  which  the  Chartists  invariably  had  the  better, 
and  as  a  result  of  which  they  were  marching  in  full  force 


CHARTISM  AND  YOUNG  IRELAND.  371 

to  the  particular  district  where  the  momentary  panic  pre- 
vailed. London  is  worse  off  than  most  cities  in  such  a 
time  of  alarm.  It  is  too  large  for  true  accounts  of  things 
rapidly  to  diffuse  themselves.  In  April,  1848,  the  street 
telegraph  was  not  in  use  for  carrying  news  through  cities, 
and  the  rapidly  succeeding  editions  of  the  cheap  papers 
were  as  yet  unknown.  In  various  quarters  of  London, 
therefore,  the  citizen  was  left  through  the  greater  part  of 
the  day  to  all  the  agonies  of  doubt  and  uncertainty. 

There  was  no  lack,  however,  of  public  precautions  against 
an  outbreak  of  armed  Chartists.  The  Duke  of  Welling- 
ton took  charge  of  all  the  arrangements  for  guarding  the 
public  buildings  and  defending  the  metropolis  generally. 
lie  acted  with  extreme  caution,  and  told  several  influen- 
tial persons  that  the  troops  were  in  readiness  everywhere, 
but  that  they  would  not  be  seen  unless  an  occasion  actually 
rose  for  calling  on  their  services.  The  coolness  and 
presence  of  mind  of  the  stern  old  soldier  are  well  illus- 
trated in  the  fact  that  to  several  persons  of  influence  and 
authority  who  came  to  him  with  suggestions  for  the  defence 
of  this  place  or  that,  his  almost  invariable  answer  was 
"  done  already,"  or  "  done  two  hours  ago,"  or  something 
of  the  kind.  A  vast  number  of  Londoners  enrolled  them- 
selves as  special  constables  for  the  maintenance  of  law 
and  order.  Nearly  two  hundred  thousand  persons,  it  is 
said,  were  sworn  in  for  this  purpose ;  and  it  will  always 
be  told  as  an  odd  incident  of  that  famous  scare,  that  the 
Prince  Louis  Napoleon,  then  living  in  London,  was  one  of 
those  who  volunteered  to  bear  arms  in  the  preservation  of 
order.  Not  a  long  time  was  to  pass  away  before  the  most 
lawless  outrage  on  the  order  and  life  of  a  peaceful  city 
was  to  be  perpetrated  by  the  special  command  of  the  man 
who  was  so  ready  to  lend  the  saving  aid  of  his  constable's 
staff  to  protect  English  society  against  some  poor  hundreds 
or  thousands  of  Engh'sh  working-men. 


372  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

The  crisis,  however,  luckily  proved  not  to  stand  in  need 
of  such  saviors  of  society.  The  Chartist  demonstration 
was  a  wretched  failure.  The  separation  of  the  Chartists 
who  wanted  force  from  those  who  wanted  orderly  proceed- 
ings reduced  the  project  to  nothing.  The  meeting  on 
Kennington  Common,  so  far  from  being  a  gathering  of 
half  a  million  of  men,  was  not  a  larger  concourse  than  a 
temperance  demonstration  had  often  drawn  together  on 
the  same  spot.  Some  twenty  or  twenty-five  thousand 
persons  were  on  Kennington  Common,  of  whom  at  least 
half  were  said  to  be  mere  lookers-on,  come  to  see  what 
was  to  happen,  and  caring  nothing  whatever  about  the 
People's  Charter.  The  procession  was  not  formed,  O'Con- 
nor himself  strongly  insisting  on  obedience  to  the  orders 
of  the  authorities.  There  were  speeches  of  the  usual  kind 
by  O'Connor  and  others  ;  and  the  opportunity  was  made 
available  by  some  of  the  more  extreme,  and  consequently 
disappointed  Chartists,  to  express  in  very  vehement  lan- 
guage their  not  unreasonable  conviction  that  the  leaders  of 
the  convention  were  humbugs.  The  whole  affair,  in  truth 
was  an  absurd  anachronism.  The  lovers  of  law  and  order 
could  have  desired  nothing  better  than  that  it  should 
thus  come  forth  in  the  light  of  day  and  show  itself.  The 
clap  of  the  hand  was  given,  but  the  slaves  with  the  jars 
of  jewels  did  not  appear.  It  is  not  that  the  demands  of 
the  Chartists  were  anachronisms  or  absurdities.  We  have 
already  shown  that  many  of  them  were  just  and  reason- 
able, and  that  all  came  within  the  fair  scope  of  political 
argument.  The  anachronism  was  in  the  idea  that  the 
display  of  physical  force  could  any  longer  be  needed  or 
be  allowed  to  settle  a  political  controversy  in  England. 
The  absurdity  was  in  the  notion  that  the  wage-receiving 
classes,  and  they  alone,  are  "  the  people  of  England." 

The  great  Chartist  petition  itself,  which  was  to  have 
made  so  profound  an  impression  on  the  House  of  Com- 


CHARTISM  AND  YOUNG  IRELAND.  -J73 

mons,  proved  as  utter  a  failure  as  the  demonstration  on 
Kennington  Common.  Mr.  O'Connor,  in  presenting  this 
portentous  document,  boasted  that  it  would  be  found  to 
have  five  million  seven  hundred  thousand  signatures  in 
round  numbers.  The  calculation  was  made  in  very  round 
numbers  indeed.  The  Committee  on  Public  Petitions 
were  requested  to  make  a  minute  examination  of  the  docu- 
ment, and  to  report  to  the  House  of  Commons.  The  com- 
mittee called  in  the  service  of  a  little  army  of  law-station- 
ers' clerks,  and  went  to  work  to  analyze  the  signatures. 
They  found,  to  begin  with,  that  the  whole  number  of 
signatures,  genuine  or  otherwise,  fell  short  of  two  mill- 
ions. But  that  was  not  all.  The  committee  found  in 
many  cases  that  whole  sheets  of  the  petition  were  signed 
by  the  one  hand,  and  that  eight  per  cent,  of  the  signatures 
were  those  of  women.  It  did  not  need  much  investiga- 
tion to  prove  that  a  large  proportion  of  the  signatures 
were  not  genuine.  The  name  of  the  Queen,  of  Prince 
Albert,  of  the  Duke  of  Wellington,  Sir  Robert  Peel,  Lord 
John  Russell,  Colonel  Sibthorp,  and  various  other  public 
personages,  appeared  again  and  again  on  the  Chartist  roll. 
Some  of  these  eminent  persons  would  appear  to  have  car- 
ried their  zeal  for  the  People's  Charter  so  far  as  to  keep 
signing  their  names  untiringly  all  over  the  petition.  A 
large  number  of  yet  stranger  allies  would  seem  to  have 
been  drawn  to  the  cause  of  the  Charter.  "  Cheeks  the 
Marine "  was  a  personage  very  familiar  at  that  time  to 
the  readers  of  Captain  Marryat's  sea  stories;  and  the 
name  of  that  mythical  hero  appeared  with  bewildering 
iteration  in  the  petition.  So  did  "  Davy  Jones  ; "  so  did 
various  persons  describing  themselves  as  Pugnose,  Flat- 
nose,  Wooden-legs,  and  by  other  such  epithets  acknowl- 
edging curious  personal  defects.  We  need  not  describe 
the  laughter  and  scorn  which  these  revelations  produced. 
There  really  was  not  anything  very  marvellous  in  the  dis- 


374  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

covery.  The  petition  was  got  up  in  great  haste  and  with 
almost  utter  carelessness.  Its  sheets  used  to  be  sent  any- 
where, and  left  lying  about  anywhere,  on  a  chance  of 
obtaining  signatures.  The  temptation  to  school-boys  and 
practical  jokers  of  all  kinds  was  irresistible.  Wherever 
there  was  a  mischievous  hand  that  could  get  hold  of  a 
pen,  there  was  some  name  of  a  royal  personage  or  some 
Cheeks  the  Marine  at  once  added  to  the  muster-roll  of  the 
Chartists.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  almost  all  large  popular 
petitions  are  found  to  have  some  such  buffooneries  mixed 
up  with  their  serious  business.  The  Committee  on  Peti- 
tions have  on  several  occasions  had  reason  to  draw  atten- 
tion to  the  obviously  fictitious  nature  of  signatures 
appended  to  such  documents.  The  petitions  in  favor  of 
O'Connell's  movement  used  to  lie  at  the  doors  of  chapels 
all  the  Sunday  long  in  Ireland,  with  pen  and  ink  ready 
for  all  who  approved  to  sign ;  and  it  was  many  a  time  the 
favorite  amusement  of  school-boys  to  scrawl  down  the 
most  grotesque  names  and  nonsensical  imitations  of 
names.  But  the  Chartist  petition  had  been  so  loudly 
boasted  of,  and  the  whole  Chartist  movement  had  created 
such  a  scare,  that  the  delight  of  the  public  generally  at 
any  discovery  that  threw  both  into  ridicule  was  over- 
whelming. It  was  made  certain  that  the  number  of  genu- 
ine signatures  was  ridiculously  below  the  estimate  formed 
by  the  Chartist  leaders ;  and  the  agitation,  after  terrify- 
ing respectability  for  a  long  time,  suddenly  showed  itself 
as  a  thing  only  to  be  laughed  at.  The  laughter  was  sten- 
torian and  overwhelming.  The  very  fact  that  the  petition 
contained  so  many  absurdities  was  in  itself  an  evidence 
of  the  sincerity  of  those  who  presented  it.  It  was  not 
likely  that  they  would  have  furnished  their  enemies  with 
so  easy  and  tempting  a  way  of  turning  them  into  ridicule, 
if  they  had  known  or  suspected  that  there  was  any  lack 
of  genuineness  in  the  signatures,  or  that  they  would  have 


CHARTISM  AND  YOUNG  IRELAND.  375 

provided  so  ready  a  means  of  decrying  their  truthfulness 
as  to  claim  five  millions  of  names  for  a  document  which 
they  knew  to  have  less  than  two  millions.  The  Chartist 
leaders  in  all  their  doings  showed  a  want  of  accurate 
calculation,  and  of  the  frame  of  mind  which  desires  or 
appreciates  such  accuracy.  The  famous  petition  was  only 
one  other  example  of  their  habitual  weakness.  It  did  not 
bear  testimony  against  their  good  faith. 

The  effect,  however,  of  this  unlucky  petition  on  the 
English  public  mind  was  decisive.  From  that  day  Chart- 
ism never  presented  itself  to  the  ordinary  middle-class 
Englishman  as  anything  but  an  object  of  ridicule.  The 
terror  of  the  agitation  was  gone.  There  were  efforts  made 
again  and  again  during  the  year  by  some  of  the  more 
earnest  and  extreme  of  the  Chartist  leaders  to  renew  the 
strength  of  the  agitation.  The  outbreak  of  the  Young 
Ireland  movement  found  many  sympathizers  among  the 
English  Chartists,  more  especially  in  its  earlier  stages ; 
and  some  of  the  Chartists  in  London  and  other  great  Eng- 
lish cities  endeavored  to  light  up  the  fire  of  their  agitation 
again  by  the  help  of  some  brands  caught  up  from  the  pile 
of  disaffection  which  Mitchel  and  Meagher  were  setting 
ablaze  in  Dublin.  A  monster  gathering  of  Chartists  was 
announced  for  "Whit-Monday,  June  12th,  and  again  the 
metropolis  was  thrown  into  a  momentary  alarm,  very  dif- 
ferent in  strength,  however,  from  that  of  the  famous  10th 
of  April.  Again  precautions  were  taken  by  the  military 
authorities  against  the  possible  rising  of  an  insurrection- 
ary mob.  Nothing  came  of  this  last  gasp  of  Chartism. 
The  Times  of  the  following  day  remarked  that  there  was 
absolutely  nothing  to  record, "  nothing  except  the  blankest 
expectation,  the  most  miserable  gaping,  gossiping,  and 
grumbling  of  disappointed  listeners ;  the  standing  about, 
the  roaming  to  and  fro,  the  dispersing  and  the  sneaking 
home  of  some  poor  simpletons  who  had  wandered  forth  in 


376  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

the  hope  of  some  miraculous  crisis  in  their  affairs."  It  is 
impossible  not  to  pity  those  who  were  thus  deceived ;  not 
to  feel  some  regret  for  the  earnestness,  the  hope,  the  igno- 
rant, passionate  energy  which  were  thrown  away. 

Nor  can  we  feel  only  surprise  and  contempt  for  those 
who  imagined  that  the  Charter  and  the  rule  of  what  was 
called  in  their  jargon  "  the  people  "  would  do  something  to 
regenerate  their  miserable  lot.  They  had  at  least  seen 
that  up  to  that  time  Parliament  had  done  little  for  them. 
There  had  been  a  Parliament  of  aristocrats  and  landlords, 
and  it  had  for  generations  troubled  itself  little  about  the 
class  from  whom  Chartism  was  recruited.  The  sceptre 
of  legislative  power  had  passed  into  the  hands  of  a  Parlia- 
ment made  up  in  great  measure  of  the  wealthy  middle 
ranks,  and  it  had  thus  far  shown  no  inclination  to  distress 
itself  overmuch  about  them.  Almost  every  single  measure 
Parliament  has  passed  to  do  any  good  for  the  wages- 
receiving  classes  and  the  poor  generally  has  been  passed 
since  the  time  when  the  Chartists  began  to  be  a  power. 
Our  Corn-laws'  repeal,  our  factory  acts,  our  sanitary 
legislation,  our  measures  referring  to  the  homes  of  the 
poor — all  these  have  been  the  work  of  later  times  than 
those  which  engendered  the  Chartist  movement.  It  is 
easy  to  imagine  a  Chartist  replying,  in  the  early  days  of 
the  movement,  to  some  grave  remonstrances  from  wise 
legislators.  He  might  say,  "  You  tell  me  I  am  mad  to 
think  the  Charter  can  do  anything  for  me  and  my  class. 
But  can  you  tell  me  what  else  ever  has  done,  or  tried  to 
do,  any  good  for  them  ?  You  think  I  am  a  crazy  person, 
because  I  believe  that  a  popular  Parliament  could  make 
anything  of  the  task  of  government.  I  ask  you  what  have 
you  and  your  like  made  of  it  already  ?  Things  are  well 
enough,  no  doubt,  for  you  and  your  class,  a  pitiful  mi- 
nority ;  but  they  could  not  be  any  worse  for  us,  and  we 
might  make  them  better,  so  far  as  the  great  majority  are 


CHAETISM  AND  YOUNG  IRELAND.  377 

concerned.  We  may  fairly  crave  a  trial  for  our  experi- 
ment. No  matter  how  wild  and  absurd  it  may  seem,  it 
could  not  turn  out  for  the  majority  any  worse  than  your 
scheme  has  done."  It  would  not  have  been  very  easy 
then  to  answer  a  speaker  who  took  this  line  of  argument. 
In  truth  there  was,  as  we  have  already  insisted,  grievance 
enough  to  excuse  the  Chartist  agitation,  and  hope  enough 
in  the  scheme  the  Chartists  proposed  to  warrant  its  fair 
discussion.  Such  movements  are  never  to  be  regarded 
by  sensible  persons  as  the  work  merely  of  knaves  and 
dupes. 

Chartism  bubbled  and  sputtered  a  little  yet  in  some  of 
the  provincial  towns,  and  even  in  London.  There  were 
Chartist  riots  in  Ashton,  Lancashire,  and  an  affray  with 
the  police,  and  the  killing,  before  the  affray,  it  is  painful 
to  have  to  say,  of  one  policeman.  There  were  Chartists 
arrested  in  Manchester  on  the  charge  of  preparing  insur- 
rectionary movements.  In  two  or  three  public-houses  in 
London  some  Chartist  juntas  were  arrested,  and  the  police 
believed  they  had  got  evidence  of  a  projected  rising  to 
take  in  the  whole  of  the  metropolis.  It  is  not  impossible 
that  some  wild  and  frantic  schemes  of  the  kind  were  talked 
of  and  partly  hatched  by  some  of  the  disappointed  fanatics 
of  the  movement.  Some  of  them  were  fiery  and  ignorant 
enough  for  anything ;  and  throughout  this  memorable 
year  thrones  and  systems  kept  toppling  down  all  over 
Europe  in  a  manner  that  might  well  have  led  feather- 
headed  agitators  to  fancy  that  nothing  was  stable,  and  that 
in  England,  too,  the  whistle  of  a  few  conspirators  might 
bring  about  a  transformation  scene.  All  this  folly  came 
to  nothing  but  a  few  arrests  and  a  few  not  heavy  sen- 
tences. Among  those  tried  in  London  on  charges  of  sedi- 
tion merely  was  Mr.  Ernest  Jones,  who  was  sentenced  to 
two  years'  imprisonment.  Mr.  Jones  has  been  already 
spoken  of  as  a  man  of  position  and  of  high  culture;  a 


378  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

poet  whose  verses  sometimes  might  almost  claim  for  their 
author  the  possession  of  genius.  He  was  an  orator  whose 
speeches  then  and  after  obtained  the  enthusiastic  admira- 
tion of  John  Bright.  He  belonged  rather  to  the  school  of 
revolutionists  which  established  itself  as  Young  Ireland, 
than  to  the  class  of  the  poor  Fussells  and  Cuffeys  and 
uneducated  working-men  who  made  up  the  foremost  ranks 
of  the  aggressive  Chartist  movement  in  its  later  period. 
He  might  have  had  a  brilliant  and  a  useful  career.  He  out- 
lived the  Chartist  era ;  lived  to  return  to  peaceful  agita- 
tion, to  hold  public  controversy  with  the  eccentric  and 
clever  Professor  Blackie,  of  Edinburgh,  on  the  relative 
advantages  of  republicanism  and  monarchy,  and  to  stand 
for  a  Parliamentary  borough  at  the  general  election  of 
1868;  and  then  his  career  was  closed  by  death.  The  close 
was  sadly  premature  even  then.  He  had  plunged  irnma- 
turely  into  politics,  and  although  a  whole  generation  had 
passed  away  since  his  debut,  he  was  but  a  young  man  com- 
paratively when  the  last  scene  came. 

Here  comes,  not  inappropriately,  to  an  end  the  history 
of  English  Chartism.  It  died  of  publicity ;  of  exposure 
to  the  air ;  of  the  Anti-Corn-law  League ;  of  the  evident 
tendency  of  the  time  to  settle  all  questions  by  reason, 
argument,  and  majorities;  of  growing  education;  of  a 
strengthening  sense  of  duty  among  all  the  more  influen- 
tial classes.  When  Sir  John  Campbell  spoke  its  obituary 
years  before,  as  we  have  seen,  he  treated  it  as  simply  a 
monster  killed  by  the  just  severity  of  the  law.  Ten  years' 
experience  taught  the  English  public  to  be  wiser  than 
Sir  John  Campbell.  Chartism  did  not  die  of  its  own  ex- 
cesses ;  it  became  an  anachronism ;  no  one  wanted  it  any 
more.  All  that  was  sound  in  its  claims  asserted  itself, 
and  was  in  time  conceded.  But  its  active  or  aggressive 
influence  ceased  with  1848.  The  history  of  the  reign  of 
Queen  Victoria  has  not  any  further  to  concern  itself  about 


CHARTISM  AND  YOUNG  IRELAND.  379 

Chartism.  Not  since  that  year  has  there  been  serious 
talk  or  thought  of  any  agitation  asserting  its  claims  by  the 
use  or  even  the  display  of  armed  force  in  England. 

The  spirit  of  the  time  had,  meanwhile,  made  itself  felt 
in  a  different  way  in  Ireland.  For  some  months  before 
the  beginning  of  the  year  the  Young  Ireland  party  had 
been  established  as  a  rival  association  to  the  Repealers 
who  still  believed  in  the  policy  of  O'Connell.  It  was  in- 
evitable that  O'Connell's  agitation  should  beget  some  such 
movement.  The  great  agitator  had  brought  the  tempera- 
ment of  the  younger  men  of  his  party  up  to  a  fever 
heat,  and  it  was  out  of  the  question  that  all  that  heat 
should  subside  in  the  veins  of  young  collegians  and  school- 
boys at  the  precise  moment  when  the  leader  found  that 
he  had  been  going  too  far,  and  gave  the  word  for  peace 
and  retreat.  The  influence  of  O'Connell  had  been  waning 
for  a  time  before  his  death.  It  was  a  personal  influence 
depending  on  his  eloquence  and  his  power,  and  these  of 
course  had  gone  down  with  his  personal  decay.  The 
Nation  newspaper,  which  was  conducted  and  written  for 
by  some  rising  young  men  of  high  culture  and  remarkable 
talent,  had  long  been  writing  in  a  style  of  romantic  and 
sentimental  nationalism  which  could  hardly  give  much 
satisfaction  to  or  derive  much  satisfaction  from  the  some- 
what cunning  and  trickish  agitation  which  O'Connell  had 
set  going.  The  Nation  and  the  clever  youths  who  wrote 
for  it  were  all  for  nationalism  of  the  Hellenic  or  French 
type,  and  were  disposed  to  laugh  at  constitutional  agita- 
tion, and  to  chafe  against  the  influence  of  the  priests. 
The  famine  had  created  an  immense  amount  of  unreason- 
able but  certainly  not  unnatural  indignation  against  the 
Government,  who  were  accused  of  having  paltered  with 
the  agony  and  danger  of  the  time,  and  having  clung  to 
the  letter  of  the  doctrines  of  political  economy  when  death 
was  invading  Ireland  in  full  force.  The  Young  Ireland 


380  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

party  had  received  a  new  support  by  the  adhesion  of  Mr. 
William  Smith  O'Brien  to  their  ranks.  Mr.  O'Brien  was 
a  man  of  considerable  influence  in  Ireland.  He  had  large 
property  and  high  rank.  He  was  connected  with  or  re- 
lated to  many  aristocratic  families.  His  brother  was  Lord 
Inchiquin ;  the  title  of  the  marquisate  of  Thomond  was 
in  the  family.  He  was  undoubtedly  descended  from  the 
famous  Irish  hero  and  king,  Brian  Boru,  and  was  almost 
inordinately  proud  of  his  claims  of  long  descent.  He  had 
the  highest  personal  character  and  the  finest  sense  of 
honor ;  but  his  capacity  for  leadership  of  any  movement 
was  very  slender.  A  poor  speaker,  with  little  more  than 
an  ordinary  country  gentleman's  share  of  intellect,  O'Brien 
was  a  well-meaning  but  weak  and  vain  man,  whose  head 
at  last  became  almost  turned  by  the  homage  which  his 
followers  and  the  Irish  people  generally  paid  to  him.  He 
was,  in  short,  a  sort  of  Lafayette  manque  ;  under  the  hap- 
piest auspices  he  could  never  have  been  more  than  a  suc- 
cessful Lafayette.  But  his  adhesion  to  the  cause  of  Young 
Ireland  gave  the  movement  a  decided  impulse.  His  rank, 
his  legendary  descent,  his  undoubted  chivalry  of  charac- 
ter and  purity  of  purpose,  lent  a  romantic  interest  to  his 
appearance  as  the  recognized  leader,  or  at  least  the  figure- 
head, of  the  Young  Irelanders. 

Smith  O'Brien  was  a  man  of  more  mature  years  than 
most  of  his  companions  in  the  movement.  He  was  some 
forty-three  or  four  years  of  age  when  he  took  the  leader- 
ship of  the  movement.  Thomas  Francis  Meagher,  the  most 
brilliant  orator  of  the  party,  a  man  who  under  other  con- 
ditions might  have  risen  to  great  distinction  in  public  life, 
was  then  only  about  two  or  three  and  twenty.  Mitchel 
and  Duff y,  who  were  regarded  as  elders  among  the  Young 
Irelanders,  were  perhaps  each  some  thirty  years  of  age. 
There  were  many  men,  more  or  less  prominent  in  the 
movement,  who  were  still  younger  than  Meagher.  One 


CHARTISM  AND  YOUNG  IRELAND.  381 

of  these,  who  afterward  rose  to  some  distinction  in 
America,  and  is  long  since  dead,  wrote  a  poem  about  the 
time  when  the  Young  Ireland  movement  was  at  its  height, 
in  which  he  commemorated  sadly  his  attainment  of  his 
eighteenth  year,  and  deplored  that,  at  an  age  when  Chat- 
terton  was  mighty  and  Keats  had  glimpses  into  spirit- 
land — the  age  of  eighteen,  to  wit — he,  this  young  Irish 
patriot,  had  yet  accomplished  nothing  for  his  native 
country.  Most  of  his  companions  sympathized  fully  with 
him,  and  thought  his  impatience  natural  and  reasonable. 
The  young  Ireland  agitation  was  at  first  a  sort  of  college 
debating  society  movement,  and  it  never  became  really 
national.  It  was  composed  for  the  most  part  of  young 
journalists,  young  scholars,  amateur  litterateurs,  poets, 
en  hcrbe,  orators  moulded  on  the  finest  patterns  of  Athens 
and  the  French  Revolution,  and  aspiring  youths  of  the 
Cherubino  time  of  life,  who  were  ambitious  of  distinction 
as  heroes  in  the  eyes  of  young  ladies.  Among  the  recog- 
nized leaders  of  the  party  there  was  hardly  one  in  want 
of  money.  Some  of  them  were  young  men  of  fortune,  or 
at  least  the  sons  of  wealthy  parents.  Not  many  of  the 
dangerous  revolutionary  elements  were  to  be  found  among 
these  clever,  respectable,  and  precocious  youths.  The 
Young  Ireland  movement  was  as  absolutely  unlike  the 
Chartist  movement  in  England  as  any  political  agitation 
could  be  unlike  another.  Unreal  and  unlucky  as  the 
Chartist  movement  proved  to  be,  its  ranks  were  recruited 
by  genuine  passion  and  genuine  misery. 

Before  the  death  of  O'Connell  the  formal  secession  of 
the  Young  Ireland  party  from  the  regular  Repealers  had 
taken  place.  It  arose  out  of  an  attempt  of  O'Connell  to 
force  upon  the  whole  body  a  declaration  condemning  the 
use  of  physical  force — of  the  sword,  as  it  was  grandiosely 
called — in  any  patriotic  movement  whatever.  It  was  in 
itself  a  sign  of  O'Connell's  failing  powers  and  judgment 


382  A  UISTOllY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

that  he  expected  to  get  a  body  of  men  about  the  age  of 
Meagher  to  make  a  formal  declaration  against  the  weapon 
of  Leonidas  and  Miltiades,  and  all  the  other  heroes  dear  to 
classically-instructed  youth.  Meagher  declaimed  against 
the  idea  in  a  burst  of  poetic  rhetoric  which  made  his  fol- 
lowers believe  that  a  new  Grattan  of  bolder  style  was 
coming  up  to  recall  the  manhood  of  Ireland  that  had  been 
banished  by  the  agitation  of  O'Connell  and  the  priests.  "  I 
am  not  one  of  these  tame  moralists,"  the  young  orator  ex- 
claimed, "  who  say  that  liberty  is  not  worth  one  drop  of 
blood.  .  .  .  Against  this  miserable  maxim  the  noblest 
virtue  that  has  saved  and  sanctified  humanity  appears  in 
judgment.  From  the  blue  waters  of  the  Bay  of  Salamis  ; 
from  the  valley  over  which  the  sun  stood  still  and  lit  the 
Israelite  to  victory  ;  from  the  cathedral  in  which  the  sword 
of  Poland  has  been  sheathed  in  the  shroud  of  Kosciusko ; 
from  the  convent  of  St.  Isidore,  where  the  fiery  hand  that 
rent  the  ensign  of  St.  George  upon  the  plains  of  Ulster 
has  mouldered  into  dust ;  from  the  sands  of  the  desert, 
where  the  wild  genius  of  the  Algerine  so  long  has  scared 
the  eagle  of  the  Pyrenees  ;  from  the  ducal  palace  in  this 
kingdom,  where  the  memory  of  the  gallant  and  seditious 
Geraldine  enhances  more  than  royal  favor  the  splendor  of 
his  race  ;  from  the  solitary  grave  within  this  mute  city 
which  a  dying  bequest  has  left  without  an  epitaph — oh  ! 
from  every  spot  where  heroism  has  had  a  sacrifice  or  a 
triumph,  a  voice  breaks  in  upon  the  cringing  crowd  that 
cherishes  this  maxim,  crying,  Away  with  it — away  with 
it!" 

The  reader  will  probably  think  that  a  generation  of 
young  men  might  have  enjoyed  as  much  as  they  could 
get  of  this  sparkling  declamation  without  much  harm 
being  done  thereby  to  the  cause  of  order.  Only  a  crowd 
of  well-educated  young  Irishmen  fresh  from  college,  and 
with  the  teaching  of  their  country's  history  which  the 


CHARTISM  AND  YOUNG  IRELAND.  383 

Nation  was  pouring  out  weekly  in  prose  and  poetry,  could 
possibly  have  understood  all  its  historical  allusions. 
No  harm,  indeed,  would  have  come  of  this  graceful  and 
poetic  movement  were  it  not  for  events  which  the  Young 
Ireland  party  had  no  share  in  bringing  about. 

The  Continental  revolutions  of  the  year  1848  suddenly 
converted  the  movement  from  a  literary  and  poetical 
organization  into  a  rebellious  conspiracy.  The  fever  of 
that  wild  epoch  spread  itself  at  once  over  Ireland.  When 
crowns  were  going  down  everywhere,  what  wonder  if 
Hellenic  Young  Irelandism  believed  that  the  moment  had 
come  when  the  crown  of  the  Saxon  invader  too  was  des- 
tined to  fall  ?  The  French  Revolution  and  the  flight  of 
Louis  Philippe  set  Ireland  in  a  rapture  of  hope  and  rebel- 
lious joy.  Lamartine  became  the  hero  of  the  hour.  A 
copy  of  his  showy,  superficial  "  Girondists  "  was  in  the 
hand  of  every  true  Young  Irelander.  Meagher  was  at 
once  declared  to  be  the  Vergniaud  of  the  Irish  revolution. 
Smith  O'Brien  was  called  upon  to  become  its  Lafayette. 
A  deputation  of  Young  Irelanders,  with  O'Brien  and 
Meagher  at  their  head,  waited  upon  Lamartine,  and  were 
received  by  him  with  a  cool  good-sense  which  made  Eng- 
lishmen greatly  respect  his  judgment  and  prudence,  but 
which  much  disconcerted  the  hopes  of  the  Young  Ire- 
landers.  Many  of  these  latter  appear  to  have  taken  in 
their  most  literal  sense  some  words  of  Lamartine's  about 
the  sympathy  of  the  new  French  Republic  with  the  strug- 
gles of  oppressed  nationalities,  and  to  have  fancied  that 
the  Republic  would  seriously  consider  the  propriety  of 
going  to  war  with  England  at  the  request  of  a  few  young 
men  from  Ireland,  headed  by  a  country  gentleman  and 
member  of  Parliament.  In  the  mean  time  a  fresh  and  a 
stronger  influence  than  that  of  O'Brien  or  Meagher  had 
arisen  in  Young  Irelandism.  Young  Ireland  itself  now 
split  into  two  sections,  one  for  immediate  action,  the  other 


384  A  HISTORY  OF  (B  OWN  TIMES. 

for  caution  and  delay.  The  party  of  action  acknowledged 
the  leadership  of  John  Mitchel.  The  organ  of  this  section 
was  the  newspaper  started  by  Mitchel  in  opposition  to 
the  Nation,  which  had  grown  too  slow  for  him.  The  new 
journal  was  called  the  United  Irishman,  and  in  a  short 
time  it  had  completely  distanced  the  Nation  in  popularity 
and  in  circulation.  The  deliberate  policy  of  the  United 
Irishman  was  to  force  the  hand  first  of  the  Government 
and  then  of  the  Irish  people.  Mitchel  had  made  up  his 
mind  so  to  rouse  the  passion  of  the  people  as  to  compel 
the  Government  to  take  steps  for  the  prevention  of  rebel- 
lion by  the  arrest  of  some  of  the  leaders.  Then  Mitchel 
calculated  upon  the  populace  rising  to  defend  or  rescue 
their  heroes — and  then  the  game  would  be  afoot ;  Ireland 
would  be  entered  in  rebellion  ;  and  the  rest  would  be  for 
fate  to  decide. 

This  looks  now  a  very  wild  and  hopeless  scheme.  So, 
of  course,  it  proved  itself  to  be.  But  it  did  not  appear  so 
hopeless  at  the  time,  even  to  cool  heads.  At  least  it  may 
be  called  the  only  scheme  which  had  the  slightest  chance 
of  success ;  we  do  not  say  of  success  in  establishing  the 
independence  of  Ireland,  which  Mitchel  sought  for,  but  in 
setting  a  genuine  rebellion  afoot.  Mitchel  was  the  one 
formidable  man  among  the  rebels  of  '48.  He  was  the 
one  man  who  distinctly  knew  what  he  wanted,  and  was 
prepared  to  run-  any  risk  to  get  it.  He  was  cast  in  the 
very  mould  of  the  genuine  revolutionist,  and  under  dif- 
ferent circumstances  might  have  played  a  formidable 
part.  He  came  from  the  northern  part  of  the  island,  and 
was  a  Protestant  Dissenter.  It  is  a  fact  worthy  of  note 
that  all  the  really  formidable  rebels  Ireland  has  produced 
in  modern  times,  from  Wolfe  Tone  to  Mitchel,  have  been 
Protestants.  Mitchel  was  a  man  of  great  literary  talent ; 
indeed  a  man  of  something  like  genius.  He  wrote  a  clear, 
bold,  incisive  prose,  keen  in  its  scorn  and  satire,  going 


CHARTISM  AN:    YOUNG  IEELAND.  385 

directly  to  the  heart  of  its  purpose.  As  mere  prose, 
some  of  it  is  worth  reading  even  to-day  for  its  cutting  force 
and  pitiless  irony.  Mitchel  issued  in  his  paper  week  after 
week  a  challenge  to  the  Government  to  prosecute  him. 
He  poured  out  the  most  fiery  sedition,  and  used  every  incen- 
tive that  words  could  supply  to  rouse  a  hot-headed  people 
to  arms,  or  an  impatient  Government  to  some  act  of  severe 
repression.  Mitchel  was  quite  ready  to  make  a  sacrifice  of 
himself  if  it  were  necessary.  It  is  possible  enough  that  he 
had  persuaded  himself  into  the  belief  that  a  rising  in  Ireland 
against  the  Government  might  be  successful.  But  there 
is  good  reason  to  think  that  he  would  have  been  quite 
satisfied  if  he  could  have  stirred  up  by  any  process  a  gen- 
uine and  sanguinary  insurrection,  which  would  have  read 
well  in  the  papers,  and  redeemed  the  Irish  Nationalists 
from  what  he  considered  the  disgrace  of  never  having 
shown  that  they  knew  how  to  die  for  their  cause. 
He  kept  on  urging  the  people  to  prepare  for  warlike 
effort,  and  every  week's  United  Irishman  contained  long 
descriptions  of  how  to  make  pikes  and  how  to  use  them ; 
how  to  cast  bullets,  how  to  make  the  streets  as  danger- 
ous for  the  hoofs  of  cavalry  horses  as  Bruce  made  the 
field  of  Bannockburn.  Some  of  the  recipes,  if  we  may 
call  them  so,  were  of  a  peculiarly  ferocious  kind.  The 
use  of  vitriol  was  recommended  among  other  destructive 
agencies.  A  feeling  of  detestation  was  not  unnaturally 
aroused  against  Mitchel,  even  in  the  minds  of  many  who 
sympathized  with  his  general  opinions  ;  and  those  whom 
we  may  call  the  Girondists  of  the  party  somewhat  shrank 
from  him,  and  would  gladly  have  been  rid  of  him.  It  is 
true  that  the  most  ferocious  of  these  vitriolic  articles 
were  not  written  by  him ;  nor  did  he  know  of  the  famous 
recommendation  about  the  throwing  of  vitriol  until  it  ap- 
peared in  print.  He  was,  however,  justly  and  properly 
as  well  as  technically  responsible  for  all  that  appeared  in 

25 


386  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

a  paper  started  with  such  a  purpose  as  that  of  the  United 
Irishman,  and  it  is  not  even  certain  that  he  would  have 
disapproved  of  the  vitriol-throwing  recommendation  if  he 
had  known  of  it  in  time.  He  never  disavowed  it,  nor 
took  any  pains  to  show  that  it  was  not  his  own.  The 
fact  that  he  was  not  its  author  is,  therefore,  only  men- 
tioned here  as  a  matter  more  or  less  interesting,  and  not 
at  all  as  any  excuse  for  MitchePs  general  style  of  news- 
paper war-making.  He  was  a  fanatic,  clever  and  fearless ; 
he  would  neither  have  asked  quarter  nor  given  it ;  and, 
undoubtedly,  if  Ireland  had  had  many  men  of  his  desper- 
ate resolve  she  would  have  been  plunged  into  a  bloody, 
an  obstinate,  and  a  disastrous  contest  against  the  strength 
of  the  British  Government. 

In  the  mean  time  th  fit  Government  had  to  do  something. 
The  Lord-lieutenant  could  not  go  on  forever  allowing  a 
newspaper  to  scream  out  appeals  to  rebellion,  and  to 
publish  every  week  minute  descriptions  of  the  easiest  and 
quickest  way  of  killing  off  English  soldiers.  The  existing 
laws  were  not  strong  enough  to  deal  with  Mitchel  and  to 
suppress  his  paper.  It  would  have  been  of  little  account 
to  proceed  against  him  under  the  ordinary  laws  which 
condemned  seditious  speaking  or  writing.  Prosecutions 
were,  in  fact,  set  on  foot  against  O'Brien,  Meagher,  and 
Mitchel  himself  for  ordinary  offences  of  that  kind ;  but 
the  accused  men  got  bail,  and  went  on  meantime  speak- 
ing and  writing  as  before,  and  when  the  cases  came  to  be 
tried  by  a  jury  the  Government  failed  to  obtain  a  convic- 
tion. The  Government,  therefore,  brought  in  a  bill  for 
the  better  security  of  the  Crown  and  Government,  making 
all  written  incitement  to  insurrection  or  resistance  to  the 
law  felony,  punishable  with  transportation.  This  meas- 
ure was  passed  rapidly  through  all  its  stages.  It  en- 
abled the  Government  to  suppress  newspapers  like  the 
United  Irishman,  and  to  keep  in  prison  without  bail, 


CHARTISM  AND  YOUNG  IRELAND.  387 

while  awaiting  trial,  any  one  charged  with  an  offence 
under  the  new  Act.  Mitchel  soon  gave  the  authorities  an 
opportunity  of  testing  the  efficacy  of  the  Act  in  his  per- 
son. He  repeated  his  incitements  to  insurrection,  was 
arrested  and  thrown  into  prison.  The  climax  of  the  ex- 
citement in  Ireland  was  reached  when  Mitchel's  trial 
came  on.  There  can  be  little  doubt  that  he  was  filled 
with  a  strong  hope  that  his  followers  would  attempt  to 
rescue  him.  He  wrote  from  his  cell  that  he  could  hear 
around  the  walls  of  his  prison  every  night  the  tramp  of 
hundreds  of  sympathizers,  "felons  in  heart  and  soul." 
The  Government,  for  their  part,  were  in  full  expectation 
that  some  sort  of  rising  would  take  place.  For  the  time, 
Smith  O'Brien,  Meagher,  and  all  the  other  Young  Ire- 
landers  were  thrown  into  the  shade,  and  the  eyes  of  the 
whole  country  were  turned  upon  Mitchel's  cell.  Had 
there  been  another  Mitchel  out-of-doors,  as  fearless  and 
reckless  as  the  Mitchel  in  the  prison,  a  sanguinary  out- 
break would  probably  have  taken  place.  But  the  leaders 
of  the  movement  outside  were  by  no  means  clear  in  their 
own  minds  as  to  the  course  they  ought  to  pursue.  Many 
of  them  were  well  satisfied  of  the  hopelessness  and  folly 
of  any  rebellious  movement,  and  nearly  all  were  quite 
aware  that,  in  any  case,  the  country  just  then  was  wholly 
unprepared  for  anything  of  the  kind.  Not  a  few  had  a 
shrewd  suspicion  that  the  movement  never  had  taken  any 
real  hold  on  the  heart  of  the  country.  Some  were  jealous 
of  Mitchel's  sudden  popularity,  and  in  their  secret  hearts 
were  disposed  to  curse  him  for  the  trouble  he  had  brought 
on  them.  But  they  could  not  attempt  to  give  open  utter- 
ance to  such  a  sentiment.  Mitchel's  boldness  and  resolve 
had  placed  them  at  a  sad  disadvantage.  He  had  that 
superiority  of  influence  over  them  that  downright  deter- 
mination always  gives  a  man  over  colleagues  who  do  not 
quite  know  what  they  would  have.  One  thing,  however, 


388  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

they  could  do ;  and  that  they  did.  They  discouraged  any 
idea  of  an  attempt  to  rescue  Mitchel.  His  trial  came  on. 
He  was  found  guilty.  He  made  a  short  but  powerful  and 
impassioned  speech  from  the  dock ;  he  was  sentenced  to 
fourteen  years'  transportation;  he  was  hurried  under 
an  escort  of  cavalry  through  the  streets  of  Dublin,  put 
on  board  a  ship  of  war,  and  in  a  few  hours  was  on  his 
way  to  Bermuda.  Dublin  remained  perfectly  quiet ;  the 
country  outside  hardly  knew  what  was  happening  until 
Mitchel  was  well  on  his  way,  and  far-seeing  persons 
smiled  to  themselves  and  said  the  danger  was  all  over. 

So,  indeed,  it  proved  to  be.  The  remainder  of  the  pro- 
ceedings partook  rather  of  the  nature  of  burlesque.  The 
Young  Ireland  leaders  became  more  demonstrative  than 
ever.  The  Nation  newspaper  now  went  in  openly  for 
rebellion,  but  rebellion  at  some  unnamed  tune,  and  when 
Ireland  should  be  ready  to  meet  the  Saxon.  It  seemed  to 
be  assumed  that  the  Saxon,  with  a  characteristic  love  of 
fair-play,  would  let  his  foes  make  all  the  preparations  they 
pleased  without  any  interference,  and  that  when  they  an- 
nounced themselves  ready,  then,  but  not  until  then,  would 
he  come  forth  to  fight  with  them.  Smith  O'Brien  went 
about  the  country  holding  reviews  of  the  "  Confederates," 
as  the  Young  Irelanders  called  themselves.  The  Govern- 
ment, however,  showed  a  contempt  for  the  rules  of  fair- 
play,  suspended  the  Habeas  Corpus  Act  hi  Ireland,  and 
issued  warrants  for  the  arrest  of  Smith  O'Brien,  Meagher, 
and  other  Confederate  leaders.  The  Young  Irelanders 
received  the  news  of  this  unchivalric  proceeding  with  an 
outburst  of  anger  and  surprise  which  was  evidently  gen- 
uine. They  had  clearly  made  up  their  minds  that  they 
were  to  go  on  playing  at  preparation  for  rebellion  as  long 
as  they  liked  to  keep  up  the  game.  They  were  completely 
puzzled  by  the  new  condition  of  things.  It  was  not  very 
clear  what  Leonidas  or  Vergniaud  would  have  done  under 


CHAETISM  AND  YOUNG  IEELANJ).  389 

such  circumstances ;  it  was  certain  that  if  they  were  all 
arrested  the  country  would  not  stir  hand  or  foot  on  their 
behalf.  Some  of  the  principal  leaders,  therefore — Smith 
O'Brien,  Meagher,  Dillon,  and  others — left  Dublin  and 
went  down  into  the  country.  It  is  not  certain  even  yet 
whether  they  had  any  clear  purpose  of  rebellion  at  first. 
It  seems  probable  that  they  thought  of  evading  arrest  for 
awhile,  and  trying  meantime  if  the  country  was  ready  to 
follow  them  into  an  armed  movement.  They  held  a  series 
of  gatherings  which  might  be  described  as  meetings  of  agi- 
tators, or  marshallings  of  rebels,  according  as  one  was 
pleased  to  interpret  their  purpose.  But  this  sort  of  thing 
very  soon  drifted  into  rebellion.  The  principal  body  of  the 
followers  of  Smith  O'Brien  came  into  collision  with  the 
police  at  a  place  called  Ballingarry,  in  Tipperary.  They 
attacked  a  small  force  of  police,  who  took  refuge  in  the 
cottage  of  a  poor  widow  named  Cormack.  The  police  held 
the  house  as  a  besieged  fort,  and  the  rebels  attacked  them 
from  the  famous  cabbage-garden  outside.  The  police  fired 
a  few  volleys.  The  rebels  fired,  with  what  wretched 
muskets  and  rifles  they  possessed,  but  without  harming  a 
single  policeman.  After  a  few  of  them  had  been  killed  or 
wounded — it  never  was  perfectly  certain  that  any  were 
actually  killed — the  rebel  army  dispersed,  and  the  rebellion 
was  all  over.  In  a  few  days  after,  poor  Smith  O'Brien 
was  taken  quietly  at  the  railway  station  in  Thurles,  Tip- 
perary. He  was  calmly  buying  a  ticket  for  Limerick  when 
he  was  recognized.  He  made  no  resistance  whatever,  and 
seemed  to  regard  the  whole  mummery  as  at  an  end.  He 
accepted  his  fate  with  the  composure  of  a  gentleman,  and, 
indeed,  in  all  the  part  which  was  left  for  him  to  play  he 
bore  himself  with  dignity.  It  is  but  justice  to  an  unfortu- 
nate gentleman  to  say  that  some  reports  which  were  rather 
ignobly  set  abroad  about  his  having  showed  a  lack  of  per- 
sonal courage  in  the  Ballingarry  affray  were,  as  all  will 


390  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

readily  believe,  quite  untrue.  Some  of  the  police  deposed 
that  during  the  fight,  if  fight  it  could  be  called,  poor 
O'Brien  exposed  his  life  with  entire  recklessness.  One 
policeman  said  he  could  have  shot  him  easily  at  several 
periods  of  the  little  drama,  but  he  felt  reluctant  to  be  the 
slayer  of  the  misguided  descendant  of  the  Irish  kings. 
It  af  terward  appeared,  also,  that  any  little  chance  of  carry- 
ing on  any  manner  of  rebellion  was  put  a  stop  toby  Smith 
O'Brien's  own  resolution  that  his  rebels  must  not  seize 
the  private  property  of  any  one.  He  insisted  that  his 
rebellion  must  pay  its  way,  and  the  funds  were  soon  out. 
The  Confederate  leader  woke  from  a  dream  when  he  saw 
his  followers  dispersing  after  the  first  volley  or  two  from 
the  police.  From  that  moment  he  behaved  like  a  dignified 
gentleman,  equal  to  the  fate  he  had  brought  upon  him. 

Meagher  and  two  of  his  companions  were  arrested  a  few 
days  after,  as  they  were  wandering  hopelessly  and  aim- 
lessly through  the  mountains  of  Tipperary.  The  prison- 
ers were  brought  for  trial  before  a  special  commission 
held  at  Clonmel,  in  Tipperary,  in  the  following  September. 
Smith  O'Brien  was  the  first  put  on  trial,  and  he  was 
found  guilty.  He  said  a  few  words  with  grave  and  digni- 
fied composure,  simply  declaring  that  he  had  endeavored 
to  do  his  duty  to  his  native  country,  and  that  he  was 
prepared  to  abide  the  consequences.  He  was  sentenced 
to  death  after  the  old  form  in  cases  of  high-treason — to 
be  hanged,  beheaded,  and  quartered.  Meagher  was  after- 
ward found  guilty.  Great  commiseration  was  felt  for  him. 
His  youth  and  his  eloquence  made  all  men  and  women 
pity  him.  His  father  was  a  wealthy  man  who  had  had  a 
respected  career  in  Parliament;  and  there  had  seemed 
at  one  time  to  be  a  bright  and  happy  life  before  young 
Meagher.  The  short  address  in  which  Meagher  vindicated 
his  actions,  when  called  upon  to  show  cause  why  sentence 
of  death  should  not  be  passed  upon  him,  was  full  of  manly 


CHARTISM  AND  YOUNG  IRELAND.  391 

and  pathetic  eloquence.  He  had  nothing,  he  said  to  re- 
tract or  ask  pardon  for.  "  I  am  not  here  to  crave  with 
faltering  lip  the  life  I  have  consecrated  to  the  independ- 
ence of  my  country.  ...  I  offer  to  my  country,  as  some 
proof  of  the  sincerity  with  which  I  have  thought  and 
spoken  and  struggled  for  her,  the  life  of  a  young  heart. 
...  The  history  of  Ireland  explains  my  crime,  and  justi- 
fies it.  ...  Even  here,  where  the  shadows  of  death  sur- 
round me,  and  from  which  I  see  my  early  grave  opening 
for  me  in  no  consecrated  soil,  the  hope  which  beckoned 
me  forth  on  that  perilous  sea  whereon  I  have  been  wrecked, 
animates,  consoles,  enraptures  me.  No,  I  do  not  despair 
of  my  poor  old  country,  her  peace,  her  liberty,  her 
glory. " 

Meagher  was  sentenced  to  death  with  the  same  hideous 
formularies  as  those  which  had  been  observed  in  the  case 
of  Smith  O'Brien.  No  one,  however,  really  believed  for  a 
moment  that  such  a  sentence  was  likely  to  be  carried  out 
in  the  reign  of  Queen  Victoria.  The  sentence  of  death  was 
changed  into  one  of  transportation  for  life.  Nor  was  even 
this  carried  out.  The  convicts  were  all  sent  to  Australia, 
and  a  few  years  after  Mitchel  contrived  to  make  his  es- 
cape, followed  by  Meagher.  The  manner  of  escape  was 
at  least  of  doubtful  credit  to  the  prisoners,  for  they  were 
placed  under  parole,  and  a  very  nice  question  was  raised 
as  to  whether  they  had  not  broken  their  parole  by  the 
attempt  to  escape.  It  was  a  nice  question,  which  in  the 
case  of  men  of  very  delicate  sense  of  honor  could,  one 
would  think,  hardly  have  arisen  at  all.  The  point  in 
Mitchel's  case  was,  that  he  actually  went  to  the  police 
court  within  whose  jurisdiction  he  was,  formally  and  pub- 
licly announced  to  the  magistrate  that  he  withdrew  his 
parole,  and  invited  the  magistrate  to  arrest  him  then  and 
there.  But  the  magistrate  was  unprepared  for  his  coming, 
and  was  quite  thrown  off  his  guard.  Mitchel  was  armed, 


392  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

and  so  was  a  friend  who  accompanied  him,  and  who  had 
planned  and  carried  out  the  escape.  They  had  horses 
waiting  at  the  door,  and  when  they  saw  that  the  magis- 
trate did  not  know  what  to  do,  they  left  the  court,  mounted 
the  horses,  and  rode  away.  It  was  contended  by  Mitchel 
and  by  his  companion,  Mr.  P.  J.  Smyth  (afterward  a  dis- 
tinguished member  of  Parliament),  that  they  had  fulfilled 
all  the  conditions  required  by  the  parole,  and  had  formally 
and  honorably  withdrawn  it.  One  is  only  surprised  how 
men  of  honor  could  thus  puzzle  and  deceive  themselves. 
The  understood  condition  of  a  parole  is  that  a  man  who 
intends  to  withdraw  it  shall  place  himself  before  his  cap- 
tors in  exactly  the  same  condition  as  he  was  when  on  his 
pledged  word  of  honor  they  allowed  him  a  comparative 
liberty.  It  is  evident  that  a  prisoner  would  never  be 
allowed  to  go  at  large  on  parole  if  he  were  to  make  use  of 
his  liberty  to  arrange  all  the  conditions  of  an  escape,  and, 
when  everything  was  ready,  take  his  captors  by  surprise, 
tell  them  he  was  no  longer  bound  by  the  conditions  of  the 
pledge,  and  that  they  might  keep  him  if  they  could.  This 
was  the  view  taken  by  Smith  O'Brien,  who  declined  to 
have  anything  to  do  with  any  plot  for  escape  while  he  was 
on  parole.  The  advisers  of  the  Crown  recommended 
that  a  conditional  pardon  should  be  given  to  the  gallant 
and  unfortunate  gentleman  who  had  behaved  in  so  honor- 
able a  manner.  Smith  O'Brien  received  a  pardon  on  con- 
dition of  his  not  returning  to  these  islands ;  but  this  con- 
dition was  withdrawn  after  a  tiem,  and  he  came  back  to 
Ireland.  He  died  quietly  hi  Wales,  in  1864.  Mitchel 
settled  for  awhile  in  Richmond,  Virginia,  and  became  an 
ardent  advocate  of  slavery  and  an  impassioned  champion 
of  the  Southern  rebellion.  He  returned  to  the  North  after 
the  rebellion,  and  more  lately  came  to  Ireland,  where, 
owing  to  some  defect  in  the  criminal  law,  he  could  not  be 
arrested,  his  time  of  penal  servitude  having  expired, 


CHARTISM  AND  YOUNG  IRELAND.  393 

although  he  had  not  served  it.  He  was  still  a  hero  with  a 
certain  class  of  the  people ;  he  was  put  up  as  a  candidate 
for  an  Irish  county,  and  elected.  He  was  not  allowed  to 
enter  the  House  of  Commons,  however ;  the  election  was 
declared  void,  and  a  new  writ  was  issued.  He  was  elected 
again,  and  some  turmoil  was  expected,  when  suddenly 
Mitchel,  who  had  long  been  in  sinking  health,  was  with- 
drawn from  the  controversy  by  death.  He  should  have 
died  before.  The  later  years  of  his  life  were  only  an  anti- 
climax. His  attitude  in  the  dock  in  1848  had  something 
of  dignity  and  heroism  in  it,  and  even  the  stanchest 
enemies  of  his  cause  admired  him.  He  had  undoubtedly 
great  literary  ability,  and  if  he  had  never  reappeared  in 
politics  the  world  would  have  thought  that  a  really  bril- 
liant light  had  been  prematurely  extinguished.  Meagher 
served  in  the  army  of  the  Federal  States  when  the  war 
broke  out,  and  showed  much  of  the  soldier's  spirit  and 
capacity.  His  end  was  premature  and  inglorious.  He 
fell  from  the  deck  of  a  steamer  one  night ;  it  was  dark, 
and  there  was  a  strong  current  running ;  help  came  too 
late.  A  false  step,  a  dark  night,  and  the  muddy  waters 
of  the  Missouri  closed  the  career  that  had  opened  with  so 
much  promise  of  brightness. 

Many  of  the  conspicuous  Young  Irelanders  rose  to  some 
distinction.  Charles  Gavan  Duffy,  the  editor  of  the  Na- 
tion, who  was  twice  put  on  his  trial  after  the  failure  of  the 
insurrection,  but  whom  the  jury  would  not  on  either  occa- 
sion convict,  became  a  member  of  the  House  of  Commons, 
and  afterwards  emigrated  to  the  colony  of  Victoria.  He 
rose  to  be  Prime-minister  there,  and  received  knighthood 
and  a  pension.  Thomas  Darcy  M'Gee,  another  prominent 
rebel,  went  to  the  United  States,  and  thence  to  Canada, 
where  he  rose  to  be  a  minister  of  the  Crown.  He  was 
one  of  the  most  loyal  supporters  of  the  British  connec- 
tion. His  untimely  death  by  the  hand  of  an  assassin  was 


394  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

lamented  in  England  as  well  as  in  the  colony  he  had  served 
so  well.  Some  of  the  young  Irelanders  remained  in  the 
United  States  and  won  repute ;  others  returned  to  Eng- 
land, and  of  these  not  a  few  entered  the  House  of  Com- 
mons and  were  respected  there,  the  follies  of  their  youth 
quite  forgotten  by  their  colleagues,  even  if  not  disowned 
by  themselves.  A  remarkable  illustration  of  the  spirit  of 
fairness  that  generally  pervades  the  House  of  Commons 
is  found  in  the  fact  that  every  one  there  respected  John 
Martin,  who  to  the  day  of  his  death  avowed  himself,  in 
Parliament  and  out  of  it,  a  consistent  and  unrepentant 
opponent  of  British  rule  in  Ireland.  He  was  respected 
because  of  the  purity  of  his  character  and  the  transparent 
sincerity  of  his  purpose.  Martin  had  been  devoted  to 
Mitchel  in  his  lifetime,  and  he  died  a  few  days  after  Mit- 
chel's  death. 

The  Young  Ireland  movement  came  and  vanished  like 
a  shadow.  It  never  had  any  reality  or  substance  in  it. 
It  was  a  literary  and  poetic  inspiration  altogether.  It 
never  took  the  slightest  hold  of  the  peasantry.  It  hardly 
touched  any  men  of  mature  years.  It  was  a  rather  pretty 
playing  at  rebellion.  It  was  an  imitation  of  the  French 
Revolution,  as  the  Girondists  imitated  the  patriots  of 
Greece  and  Rome.  But  it  might,  perhaps,  have  had  a 
chance  of  doing  memorable  mischief  if  the  policy  of  the 
one  only  man  in  the  business  who  really  was  in  earnest, 
and  was  reckless,  had  been  carried  out.  It  is  another 
illustration  of  the  fact,  which  O'Connell's  movement  had 
exemplified  before,  that  in  Irish  politics  a  climax  cannot 
be  repeated  or  recalled.  There  is  something  fitful  in  all 
Irish  agitation.  The  national  emotion  can  be  wrought  up 
to  a  certain  temperature;  and  if  at  that  boiling-point 
nothing  is  done,  the  heat  suddenly  goes  out,  and  no  blow- 
ing of  Cyclopean  bellows  can  rekindle  it.  The  Repeal 
agitation  was  brought  up  to  this  point  when  the  meeting 


CHARTISM  AND  YOUNG  IRELAND,  395 

at  Clontarf  was  convened ;  the  dispersal  of  the  meeting 
was  the  end  of  the  whole  agitation.  With  the  Young 
Ireland  movement  the  trial  of  Mitchel  formed  the  climax. 
After  that  a  wise  legislator  would  have  known  that  there 
was  nothing  more  to  fear.  Petion,  the  revolutionary 
Mayor  of  Paris,  knew  that  when  it  rained  his  partisans 
could  do  nothing.  There  were,  in  1848,  observant  Irish- 
men who  knew  that  after  the  Mitchel  climax  had  been 
reached  the  crowd  would  disperse,  not  to  be  collected 
again  for  that  time. 

These  two  agitations,  the  Chartist  and  the  Young  Ire- 
land, constituted  what  may  be  called  our  tribute  to  the 
power  of  the  insurrectionary  spirit  that  was  abroad  over 
Europe  in  1848.  In  almost  every  other  European  State 
revolution  raised  its  head  fiercely,  and  fought  out  its  claims 
in  the  very  capital,  under  the  eyes  of  bewildered  royalty. 
The  whole  of  Italy,  from  the  Alps  to  the  Straits  of  Mes- 
sina, and  from  Venice  to  Genoa,  was  thrown  into  convul- 
sion ;  "  Our  Italy  "  once  again  "  shone  o'er^  with  civil 
swords."  There  was  insurrection  in  Berlin  and  in  Vienna. 
The  Emperor  had  to  fly  from  the  latter  city  as  the  Pope 
had  fled  from  Rome.  In  Paris  there  came  a  Red  Repub- 
lican rising  against  a  Republic  that  strove  not  to  be  Red, 
and  the  rising  was  crushed  by  Cavaignac  with  a  terrible 
strenuousness  that  made  some  of  the  streets  of  Paris  liter- 
ally to  run  with  blood.  It  was  a  grim  foreshadowing  of 
the  Commune  of  1871.  Another  remarkable  foreshadow- 
ing of  what  was  to  come  was  seen  in  the  fact  that  the 
Prince  Louis  Napoleon,  long  an  exile  from  France,  had 
been  allowed  to  return  to  it,  and  at  the  close  of  the  year, 
in  the  passion  for  law  and  order  at  any  price  born  of  the 
Red  Republican  excesses,  had  been  elected  President  of 
the  French  Republic.  Hungary  was  in  arms ;  Spam  was 
in  convulsion ;  even  Switzerland  was  not  safe.  Our  con- 
tribution to  this  general  commotion  was  to  be  found  in 


396  A  HISTORY  OF  OUR  OWN  TIMES. 

the  demonstration  on  Kennington  Common,  and  the  abor- 
tive attempt  at  a  rising  near  Ballingarry.  There  could 
not  possibly  be  a  truer  tribute  to  the  solid  strength  of  our 
system.  Not  for  one  moment  was  the  political  constitu- 
tion of  England  seriously  endangered.  Not  for  one  hour 
did  the  safety  of  our  great  communities  require  a  call 
upon  the  soldiers  instead  of  upon  the  police.  Not  one 
charge  of  cavalry  was  needed  to  put  down  the  fiercest  out- 
burst of  the  rebellious  spirit  in  England.  Not  one  single 
execution  took  place.  The  meaning  of  this  is  clear.  It  is 
not  that  there  were  no  grievances  in  our  system  calling 
for  redress.  It  is  not  that  the  existing  institutions  did 
not  bear  heavily  down  on  many  classes.  It  is  not  that 
our  political  or  social  system  was  so  conspicuously  better 
than  that  of  some  European  countries  which  were  torn 
and  ploughed  up  by  revolution.  To  imagine  that  we  owed 
our  freedom  from  revolution  to  our  freedom  from  serious 
grievance,  would  be  to  misread  altogether  the  lessons 
offered  to  ^ur  statesmen  by  that  eventful  year.  We  have 
done  the  work  of  whole  generations  of  Reformers  in  the 
interval  between  this  time  and  that.  We  have  made 
peaceful  reforms,  political,  industrial,  legal,  since  then, 
which,  if  not  to  be  had  otherwise,  would  have  justified 
any  appeal  to  revolution.  There,  however,  we  touch  upon 
the  lesson  of  the  time.  Our  political  and  constitutional 
system  rendered  an  appeal  to  force  unnecessary  and  super- 
fluous. No  call  to  arms  was  needed  to  bring  about  any 
reform  that  the  common  judgment  of  the  country  might 
demand.  Other  peoples  flew  to  arms  because  they  were 
driven  by  despair ;  because  there  was  no  way  in  their 
political  constitution  for  the  influence  of  public  opinion 
to  make  itself  justly  felt;  because  those  who  were  in 
power  held  it  by  the  force  of  bayonets,  and  not  of  public 
agreement.  The  results  of  the  year  were,  on  the  whole, 
unfavorable  to  popular  liberty.  The  results  of  the  year 


CHARTISM  AND  YOUNG  IRELAND  397 

that  followed  were  decidedly  reactionary.  The  time  had 
not  come,  in  1848  or  1849,  for  Liberal  principles  to  assert 
themselves.  Their  "great  deed,"  to  quote  some  of  the 
words  of  our  English  poetess,  Elizabeth  Barrett  Browning, 
"  was  too  great."  We  in  this  country  were  saved  alike 
from  the  revolution  and  the  reaction  by  the  universal  rec- 
ognition of  the  fact,  among  all  who  gave  themselves  time 
to  think,  that  public  opinion,  being  the  ultimate  ruling 
power,  was  the  only  authority  to  which  an  appeal  was 
needed,  and  that  in  the  end  justice  would  be  done.  All 
but  the  very  wildest  spirits  could  afford  to  wait ;  and  no 
revolutionary  movement  is  really  dangerous  which  is  only 
the  work  of  the  wildest  spirits. 


DATE  DUE 


2*66 


PRINTED  INU.S.A. 


A     000  882  643     0 


